On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 07:38 +0800, Luck, Tony wrote: > > Thanks. So Tony, how do think about the IA64 part of the patch? > > Having to use ia64_peek() and ia64_poke() to copy the RBS 8 bytes > at a time looks a bit ugly ... but this isn't in the performance > path (unless you are running your whole application under strace(1)!) > so it probably isn't an issue. If it turns out to be, then an > incremental fix on top of this would be the way to go. > So I'm ok with the ia64 parts ... which leaves the open issue > of the generic part (moving the spin_unlock_irq() after the > set_current_state(TASK_TRACED)) ... which (if I follow this > thread correctly) is still an open issue, right? Right. Roland, can you help on this? I remember you said you know how to fix it, I'm not familar on this. Thanks, Shaohua - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|