On 11/26/2012 5:08 AM, Jassi Brar wrote: > The patchset introduces 64-bit atomic ops, which would need > init_atomic64_lock() already called, but that is an initcall made too > late. Should we consider calling init_atomic64_lock() sooner in > start_kernel()? > > As an example of breakage, I see the following dump with > CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK on an OMAP based Pandaboard.
I saw this post while searching lkml for similar problems. Perhaps you can try applying my patch to see if this BUG message goes away. Thanks. https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/19/302 -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
