On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > The setup was a Intel board with 1 PATA/4 SATA onboard and only a CD-ROM
> > > and a external Promise PATA controller with two PATA disks.
> >
> > actual OOPS would be very useful
>
> It's difficult because I don't have serial on that machine.
Maybe w
> > The setup was a Intel board with 1 PATA/4 SATA onboard and only a CD-ROM
> > and a external Promise PATA controller with two PATA disks.
>
> actual OOPS would be very useful
It's difficult because I don't have serial on that machine.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
On 7/7/05, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:09:00PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > > Yes. Except that if hwif is NULL, we'll have other oopses since we access
> > > that in other places.
> > >
> > > Why _is_ hw
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 12:09:00PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > Yes. Except that if hwif is NULL, we'll have other oopses since we access
> > that in other places.
> >
> > Why _is_ hwif NULL anyway? That's another, unrelated thing, and should
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Yes. Except that if hwif is NULL, we'll have other oopses since we access
> that in other places.
>
> Why _is_ hwif NULL anyway? That's another, unrelated thing, and should
> probably have a separate check and an early return.
I was wondering about t
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > If you make it use a trivial inline function for the thing, I think that
> > would be ok, though.
>
> Like this?
Yes. Except that if hwif is NULL, we'll have other oopses since we access
that in
On Thu, Jul 07 2005, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > If you make it use a trivial inline function for the thing, I think that
> > would be ok, though.
>
> Like this?
>
> Index: linux-2.6.git/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
> ===
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> If you make it use a trivial inline function for the thing, I think that
> would be ok, though.
Like this?
Index: linux-2.6.git/drivers/ide/ide-probe.c
===
--- linux-2.6.git.orig/drivers/
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > node = -1 if the node cannot be determined.
>
> But that will crash right now.
That was fixed. Have a look at the git logs.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majo
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:32:51AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:21:55AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Without this patch a dual Xeon EM64T machine would oops on
On 7/7/05, Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:21:55AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > > > Without this patch a dual Xeon EM64T machine would oops on boot
> > > >
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:38:17AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> >
> > Here is IMHO the right way to fix this. Test for the hwif != NULL and
> > test for pci_dev != NULL before determining the node number of the pci
> > bus that the device is
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> Here is IMHO the right way to fix this. Test for the hwif != NULL and
> test for pci_dev != NULL before determining the node number of the pci
> bus that the device is connected to.
I think this is pretty unreadable.
If you make it use a trivia
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:21:55AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > Without this patch a dual Xeon EM64T machine would oops on boot
> > > because the hwif pointer here was NULL. I also added a check for
> >
On Thu, Jul 07, 2005 at 09:21:55AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > Without this patch a dual Xeon EM64T machine would oops on boot
> > because the hwif pointer here was NULL. I also added a check for
> > pci_dev because it's doubtful that all IDE devic
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Without this patch a dual Xeon EM64T machine would oops on boot
> because the hwif pointer here was NULL. I also added a check for
> pci_dev because it's doubtful that all IDE devices have pci_devs.
Here is IMHO the right way to fix this. Test for the hwif
16 matches
Mail list logo
