On Sun, Oct 08, 2006 at 08:26:44PM +0200, Kevin D. Kissell wrote: > While setting up ra "by hand" and transferring control via the jr > is a reasonable optimization, you're otherwise breaking things for SMTC. > While the comments are misleading (they accurately described an earlier > version of the code), the function being called here is ipi_decode(), which > needs a pt_regs * in the first argument (hence the copy of the sp), and > the pointer to the IPI message descriptor in the second. > > Do you have access to a 34K to test changes to SMTC? I'd have > expected this one to have been pretty quickly fatal. The shakeup of the code by the recent series of pt_regs related cleanups is pretty massive. As of last night I only had uniprocessor support working again. VSMP and SMTC were broken; actual multi-core CPU not tested yet. Ralf
