summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/arch/sparc/kernel/process.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2007-03-12[SPARC]: Fix TIF_USEDFPU flag atomicityWilliam Lee Irwin III1-8/+8
From: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2007-01-30[PATCH] missing exports of pm_power_off() on alpha and sparc32Al Viro1-0/+1
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2006-06-30Remove obsolete #include <linux/config.h>Jörn Engel1-1/+0
Signed-off-by: Jörn Engel <joern@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
2006-02-07[PATCH] restore power-off on sparc32Al Viro1-1/+1
Damn you, Eric Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
2006-01-12[PATCH] sparc: task_stack_page()Al Viro1-4/+4
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-01-12[PATCH] sparc: task_thread_info()Al Viro1-2/+2
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-11-09[PATCH] sched: resched and cpu_idle reworkNick Piggin1-20/+15
Make some changes to the NEED_RESCHED and POLLING_NRFLAG to reduce confusion, and make their semantics rigid. Improves efficiency of resched_task and some cpu_idle routines. * In resched_task: - TIF_NEED_RESCHED is only cleared with the task's runqueue lock held, and as we hold it during resched_task, then there is no need for an atomic test and set there. The only other time this should be set is when the task's quantum expires, in the timer interrupt - this is protected against because the rq lock is irq-safe. - If TIF_NEED_RESCHED is set, then we don't need to do anything. It won't get unset until the task get's schedule()d off. - If we are running on the same CPU as the task we resched, then set TIF_NEED_RESCHED and no further action is required. - If we are running on another CPU, and TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG is *not* set after TIF_NEED_RESCHED has been set, then we need to send an IPI. Using these rules, we are able to remove the test and set operation in resched_task, and make clear the previously vague semantics of POLLING_NRFLAG. * In idle routines: - Enter cpu_idle with preempt disabled. When the need_resched() condition becomes true, explicitly call schedule(). This makes things a bit clearer (IMO), but haven't updated all architectures yet. - Many do a test and clear of TIF_NEED_RESCHED for some reason. According to the resched_task rules, this isn't needed (and actually breaks the assumption that TIF_NEED_RESCHED is only cleared with the runqueue lock held). So remove that. Generally one less locked memory op when switching to the idle thread. - Many idle routines clear TIF_POLLING_NRFLAG, and only set it in the inner most polling idle loops. The above resched_task semantics allow it to be set until before the last time need_resched() is checked before going into a halt requiring interrupt wakeup. Many idle routines simply never enter such a halt, and so POLLING_NRFLAG can be always left set, completely eliminating resched IPIs when rescheduling the idle task. POLLING_NRFLAG width can be increased, to reduce the chance of resched IPIs. Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> Cc: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-11-09[PATCH] sched: disable preempt in idle tasksNick Piggin1-0/+4
Run idle threads with preempt disabled. Also corrected a bugs in arm26's cpu_idle (make it actually call schedule()). How did it ever work before? Might fix the CPU hotplugging hang which Nigel Cunningham noted. We think the bug hits if the idle thread is preempted after checking need_resched() and before going to sleep, then the CPU offlined. After calling stop_machine_run, the CPU eventually returns from preemption and into the idle thread and goes to sleep. The CPU will continue executing previous idle and have no chance to call play_dead. By disabling preemption until we are ready to explicitly schedule, this bug is fixed and the idle threads generally become more robust. From: alexs <ashepard@u.washington.edu> PPC build fix From: Yoichi Yuasa <yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp> MIPS build fix Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Yoichi Yuasa <yuasa@hh.iij4u.or.jp> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-07-26[PATCH] Don't export machine_restart, machine_halt, or machine_power_off.Eric W. Biederman1-6/+0
machine_restart, machine_halt and machine_power_off are machine specific hooks deep into the reboot logic, that modules have no business messing with. Usually code should be calling kernel_restart, kernel_halt, kernel_power_off, or emergency_restart. So don't export machine_restart, machine_halt, and machine_power_off so we can catch buggy users. Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-05-05[SPARC]: Remove legacy stuff from cpu_idle().Coywolf Qi Hunt1-5/+0
Currently sparc and sparc64's UP cpu_idle() checks current pid. This is old time legacy. Now it's paranoia. Signed-off-by: Coywolf Qi Hunt <coywolf@lovecn.org> Acked-by: William Irwin <wli@holomorphy.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2005-04-24[SPARC]: dump_stack for sparcTom 'spot' Callaway1-0/+11
Bob Breuer wrote a patch to add dump_stack for sparc. Supposedly, this was applied, but it doesn't exist in 2.6.11. This is the same patch, rediffed against 2.6.11. Signed-off-by: Tom 'spot' Callaway <tcallawa@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2005-04-16Linux-2.6.12-rc2v2.6.12-rc2Linus Torvalds1-0/+746
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history, even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about 3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good infrastructure for it. Let it rip!