Re: reg_scan info validity during jump

[Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>]

Am Mon, 13 Jul 1998 schrieb David S. Miller:
>Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 19:57:12 -0700
>   From: "David S. Miller" <davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com>
>
>      Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 01:25:24 -0600
>      From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
>
>	In message <19980711003058.A9249@dot.cygnus.com>you write:
>	> As I mentioned to Dave, I think the proper solution is to have 
>	> incremental update functions to call, a-la record_base_value.
>
>      That is certainly  the right way to go long term.  But do we want
>      to fart with that now when all we have to do is return 0 if the
>      register is >= max_reg?
>
>   Yes, I certainly think so.  I'm working tonight on the solution
>   suggested by rth.
>
>I've just checked in this work after heavy regression testing.
>
>Franz, can you check the latest CVS tree and test it to
>make sure your original bug case is still fixed?  Thanks.

Original bug on powerpc-unknown-linux-gnu is still fixed.

Thanks again,
Franz.