Subject: Re: inb flaky & 2.2.5 pre-release

From: Russell King - ARM Linux Admin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 22:46:31 +0100 (BST)

Nicolas Pitre writes:
> On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, Russell King - ARM Linux Admin wrote:
> > Already done, with SA-110 rev. K bug fix as well.  All that remains is
> > thorough testing.
> 
> Do you have a patch I could test on the SA1100?

Not yet - I'm at this moment confirming that it still compiles for all
of my 4 test architectures - RPC, EBSA110, EBSA285 and A5K.  If all
goes well, a pre-patch could be out tomorrow evening...

This is a /major/ change, so I'm going to drop the next few releases
back to pre-release status until I'm happy with it, and I'm happy that
no one else is having problems with it.

Currently, I think that there might be a problem with the cache bits
becoming unset somewhere.  However, since I don't have a gdb that I
can run against the kernel, I can't find this out.  This will take
a while to sort out (time to dig out some of my old hacks for /proc)...

PS, Today is the last exception that I'm making.  The last day to get
patches integrated into the next Sunday's kernel source is the prior
Friday, as it always has been.  This is a rule that I will be
sticking hard and fast to from now on.  Any patches received after
Friday will not even be looked at until the following Monday.
   _____
  |_____| ------------------------------------------------- ---+---+-
  |   |        Russell King       [email-masked]      --- ---
  | | | |  http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/~rmk/armlinux.html    /  /  |
  | +-+-+                                                     --- -+-
  /   |               THE developer of ARM Linux              |+| /|\
 /  | | |                                                     ---  |
    +-+-+ -------------------------------------------------  /\\\  |
unsubscribe: body of `unsubscribe linux-arm' to [email-masked]

---

From: Nicholas Clark <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 21:45:43 +0100 (BST)

> no one else is having problems with it.

Can't get a perl that segvs on 2.2.3 on demand now, which is irritating, as
I wanted to see if the K fix was effective. However, I've compiled glibc2.1
successfully on 2.2.5 today. I'll have a go at bootstrapping egcs, as that was
another cause of failure with 2.2.3 and (presumed) K bug.

2.2.5 seems pretty stable for me.

Nick