2008/8/26 james toy <unk.nown@unix.net>:
quoted text
> Andrew,
>
> Yes, ours does look like this -- however when i checked the git diff on git
> web i found:
>
> index d2d9d74..6dd8907 100644 (file)
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/microcode_intel.c
> @@ -531,12 +531,14 @@ static struct microcode_ops microcode_intel_ops = {
>
>  static int __init microcode_intel_module_init(void)
>  {
> -       struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(get_cpu());
> +       struct cpuinfo_x86 *c = &cpu_data(0);

(err... I'm a bit confused by the use of "fixed" here. The snippet
posted by Andrew illustrates how it was _before_ the fix,
i.e. it's the version that causes the "scheduling while atomic" bug).

IOW, If your local version has cpu_data(get_cpu()) in
microcode_intel_module_init(), then it explains the trace you have
observed. That also means you are not up-to-date with -next.


-- 
Best regards,
Dmitry Adamushko
--
unsubscribe notice
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/