Linus Torvalds writes: (Summary) wrote:
So I do think that the original patch is buggy.
So I do think that the original patch is buggy.
What I think *may* be going on is:
What I think *may* be going on is:
- first we do that
- first we do that
get_cpu_cap(c);
get_cpu_address_sizes(c);
get_cpu_address_sizes(c);
[...]
fix it.So I do think that the original patch is buggy.
So I do think that the original patch is buggy.
What I think *may* be going on is:
What I think *may* be going on is:
- first we do that
- first we do that
get_cpu_cap(c);
get_cpu_address_sizes(c);
get_cpu_address_sizes(c);
but at that point, CPU levels may be masked, and that 0x80000008 leaf isn't seen - then we do if (this_cpu->c_early_init) this_cpu->c_early_init(c);