[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 08:37:32 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
linux-parisc <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@...artin.ca>,
Randolph Chung <randolph@...sq.org>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
John David Anglin <dave@...uly1.hia.nrc.ca>,
stable@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] parisc: fix module loading failure of large kernel
modules (take 4)
On Thu, 1 Jan 2009 15:24:01 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 31 Dec 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > >
> > > Adrian claimed that it was gcc-4.1.0 and 4.1.1 only. He proposed
> > > banning them: http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/8/5/444
> >
> > If it really is just those releases, then yes, considering the number of
> > cases we apparently have, and considering how ugly it is in some cases
> > to move the weak function anywhere else, maybe banning those versions is
> > the proper thing to do.
> >
> > It probably won't hurt very many people - yeah, some people will be
> > forced to upgrade, but I have this memory of early 4.1 having had other
> > bugs anyway, so it's probably a good idea.
>
> That would be _really_ nice to do IMHO
I wonder if we should do it in -stable too. Probably yes.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists