Regression on UP ARM from commit e18d65f0500b95d8724b17d8ea9f1116cf390bbe

[Pekka Enberg]

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Pekka Enberg <penberg at cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> On 9/13/10 4:58 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 12 Sep 2010, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>
>>> commit e18d65f0500b95d8724b17d8ea9f1116cf390bbe
>>> "slub: Remove static kmem_cache_cpu array for boot"
>>> made my ARM 926 UP system hang at boot, if I revert this (have
>>> to back out a lot of SLUB patches for that) it comes back up. (Same if I
>>> switch to SLAB.)
>>>
>>> Any hints on how I can get patch around this in a nice way?
>>
>> This is UP right? Any more details on this one? Does ARM have
>> earlyprintk?
>>
>> Tejun also has some patches that make the percpu allocator work on UP so
>> that we do not need the hack (you must have the hack which is commit
>> c23e5ad729ac43f5e2fbc080f94cf61f07b4d45f as well to make UP work right!).
>>
>> I am not sure if they are already in -next though.
>
> Yes, they should be in linux-next. I haven't pulled the changes to slab.git,
> though. Linus, do things work in linux-next if you revert commit
> 5249d039500f05a5ab379286b1d23ab9b04d3f2c ("Slub: UP bandaid")?

Linus, care to retest linux-next on your configuration? The above
commit has now been replaced with proper UP per-cpu allocator support
by Tejun Heo.

                        Pekka