On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 09:44:47PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 06:15:04PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote: > > Hi Javier, > > > > On 06/25/2012 05:31 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > > <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 08:51:37AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > > >>> It seems the same patch has been there for a while. > > >>> > > >>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1303115 > > >> > > >> Bah, why doesn't stuff like this get resent if nothing has happened for > > >> a while? > > > > > > Indeed. At least other people that face the same issue (like me) sends > > > similar patches to remind you :-) > > > > I checked with Russell but this one is not in his patch tracking system > > [1] and so still not queued. Can you submit this? Would be great to get > > this one in. > > I did comment on this one: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1303115 > > and I really think we should fix the cause of the problem, rather than > point patching this instance of it. What do you think needs fixing there? We support booting a kernel on systems with or without SMP support, even with a SMP kernel. When the kernel is booted on such a system, it is undefined whether smp_cross_call() is a valid function pointer. In any case, when we have only one CPU online in the system, it is pointless even calling smp_cross_call(). That is why I explicitly suggested this solution. This is the solution _I_ want, because it is the most sane solution all round. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
