On Wed, 21 May 2003, Russell King wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 10:29:23AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > On Mon, May 19, 2003 at 05:20:27PM +0400, Vladimir Serov wrote:
> > > My current kernel is 2.4.21-pre6 based with patches from 2.4.19-rmk7
> > > applied (well partially, except ide and pci cause i don't have them,
> > > board is mostly brutus). I'm using HARD mounted nfs
> > > volume now !!! The tail of dmesg is following.
> >
> > Looking back on stuff which happened a long time ago, there's a
> > possibility that there's an ordering issue with set_current_state.
> >
> > Please note that this is affects _all_ 2.4 architectures.
> >
> > I think this was discussed about 6 months ago, so I'm surprised this
> > hasn't made it into the 2.4.2x kernel (or no one else has seen the
> > problem.)
>
> Yes, it was first discovered 7 months ago, but it seems Marcelo didn't
> merge the fix:
>
> > Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:00:58 -0400 (EDT)
> > From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
> > To: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@conectiva.com.br>
> > Subject: [PATCH] set_task_state() UP memory barriers
>
> Nicolas included a more complete fix which updates all 2.4 architectures.
> Nico - could you re-send your fix please?
Here it is, again.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 23 2003 - 22:00:44 EST