On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 11:22:56AM +0200, Thomas Schlichter wrote:
> Well, I didn't try the CPU_MASK_NONE fix. I am using my fix attached to my
> first mail, but Andrew ment it was too complex (your quoting from above). So
> he proposed the simpler fix, wich simply looked good to me...
Could you try the following?
diff -prauN mm3-2.5.74-1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c mm3-2.5.74-apm-1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c
--- mm3-2.5.74-1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c 2003-07-09 00:03:25.000000000 -0700
+++ mm3-2.5.74-apm-1/arch/i386/kernel/apm.c 2003-07-10 00:53:51.000000000 -0700
@@ -506,8 +506,6 @@ static void apm_error(char *str, int err
* Lock APM functionality to physical CPU 0
*/
-#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
-
static cpumask_t apm_save_cpus(void)
{
cpumask_t x = current->cpus_allowed;
@@ -522,17 +520,6 @@ static inline void apm_restore_cpus(cpum
set_cpus_allowed(current, mask);
}
-#else
-
-/*
- * No CPU lockdown needed on a uniprocessor
- */
-
-#define apm_save_cpus() 0
-#define apm_restore_cpus(x) (void)(x)
-
-#endif
-
/*
* These are the actual BIOS calls. Depending on APM_ZERO_SEGS and
* apm_info.allow_ints, we are being really paranoid here! Not only
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jul 15 2003 - 22:00:34 EST