On Tue, Sep 06, 2011 at 09:15:07AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> It's possible that one of the flushing patches is to blame; I just can't
> see how. Most likely is
>
> commit d7dd2ff11b7fcd425aca5a875983c862d19a67ae
> Author: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu Apr 14 18:25:21 2011 -0500
>
> [PARISC] only make executable areas executable
>
This looks promising, the second commit doesn't touch the flush_*_local,
so I think it's probably not a candidate.
Rolf, can you revert d7dd2ff11b7fcd425aca5a875983c862d19a67ae and see
what happens?
Thanks James.
--Kyle
> Least likely:
>
> commit b7d45818444a31948cfc7849136013a0ea54b2fb
> Author: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri Apr 15 12:37:22 2011 -0500
>
> [PARISC] prevent speculative re-read on cache flush
>
> James
>
>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Linux USB Devel]
[Video for Linux]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Photo]
[Yosemite News]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Free Online Dating]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
[XFree86]