On Sun, 2012-01-08 at 17:29 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 5:06 PM, richard -rw- weinberger
> <richard.weinberger@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 1:18 AM, Linus Torvalds
> > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >> Ok, both of the patches look sane to me, but it would really be nice
> >> to hear from somebody with the actual affected architectures, and get
> >> a tested-by.
> >
> > UML is affected:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/1/8/186
> >
> > I wasted an hour finding out why it is crashing.
> > Instead of testing kernels I really should read more LKML. ;-)
>
> Hmm.
>
> Ben - how about that
>
> static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct cpu, cpu_devices);
>
> approach that Richard uses in his patch, instead of the kcalloc?
That seems perfectly good.
> And
> clearly UM should also do that CONFIG_GENERIC_CPU_DEVICES thing with
> your patch.
>
> Richard - does Ben's patch work for you too if you just add "select
> GENERIC_CPU_DEVICES" in the UM Kconfig too (Kconfig.common, probably)?
Sorry, I meant to cover UM as well but I couldn't see how its Kconfig
files were organised.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans.
- John Lennon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part