Benjamin Herrenschmidt writes: > > On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 22:23 -0500, pac...@kosh.dhis.org wrote: > > The diff fragment above applied inside prom_close_stdin, but there are > > some > > prom_printf calls after prom_close_stdin. Calling prom_printf after > > closing > > stdout sounds like it could be bad. If I moved it down below all the > > prom_printf's, it would be after the "quiesce" call. Would that be > > acceptable > > (or even interesting as an experiment)? Does a close need a quiesce > > after it? > > Just try :-) "quiesce" is something that afaik only apple ever > implemented anyways. It uses hooks inside their OF to shut down all > drivers that do bus master (among other HW sanitization tasks).
I booted a version with a prom_close_stdout after the last prom_debug. It didn't have any effect. That 1000Hz clock was still ticking. -- Alan Curry _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
