On Thu, 15 Jun 2023, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 10:43:30PM -0700, Hugh Dickins wrote:
I do hope that you find the first fixes the breakage; but if not, then
I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the first patch did not fix the
breakage, I see the same issue.
Boo!
I even more fervently hope that the second will, despite my hating it.
Touch wood for the first, fingers crossed for the second, thanks,
Thankfully, the second one does. Thanks for the quick and thoughtful
responses!
Hurrah!
Thanks a lot, Nathan. I'll set aside my disappointment and curiosity,
clearly I'm not going to have much of a future as a MIPS programmer.
I must take a break, then rush Andrew the second patch, well, not
exactly that second patch, since most of that is revert: I'll just
send the few lines of replacement patch (with a new Subject line, as
update_mmu_cache() goes back to being separate from __update_tlb()).
Unless you object, I'll include a Tested-by: you. I realize that
your testing is limited to seeing it running; but that's true of
most of the testing at this stage - it gets to be more interesting
when the patch that adds the rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock()
is added on top later.
Thanks again,
Hugh
