crn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Kjetil Oftedal <oftedal@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 26 Dec 2010 13:34:56 +0100
On 22 December 2010 23:28, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Daniel Hellstrom <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 14:23:27 +0100
I will try to create a patch for the atomic layer for SMP LEON systems
since they have the CASA instruction.
But see my other posting, you still have to fix the irq15 problem.
Merely switching to CASA doesn't mean you don't still have a problem
because spin_lock_irqsave() and other similar pieces of code expect
they will not be interrupted by smp_call_function() calls.
Was SPARC32 SMP in 2.4 also implemented using IRQ15/NMI ?
Yes, it's essentially always had this problem.
It was less important back then because smp_call_function() was
really not used much by generic code. Now it's used everywhere.
Maybe this could be why I could never get a sun4d SS1000E with 8
processors to stay up for more than a few minutes without locking solid.
OTOH it could be irrelevant.
It might very well be due to this problem. The boot up process and much
other stuff work every time, however after some minutes of more CPU-load
the system tend to hang. That is the behaviour which we have seen so far.
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
