From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 13:43:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 13:43:33 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.130]:50943 "EHLO e32.bld.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 28 Sep 2001 13:43:20 -0400 Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 10:50:05 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Alan Cox cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: Adding a printk in start_secondary breaks 2.4.10, not 2.4.9 ?? Message-ID: <946825303.1001674205@[10.10.1.2]> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.5 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > The console locking changes have I suspect broken your bandaid. I guess > this time you need to fix it properly. Garbled panics normally occur when > both cpus panic in parallel. That really wants some kind of timed spinlock > to try and dump them one after the other Humpf. You mean I've got to get rid of my disgusting hack? Sigh ... OK. ;-) FWIW, I still think that means that the console locking changes are broken - adding a printk shouldn't panic the kernel. I'll go look at the console locking changes (*and* fix my disgusting hack ;-) ) M.