linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11]: Hibernation: fix the number of pages used for hibernate/thaw buffering

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 22 Apr 2012 22:29:46 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Bojan Smojver <bojan@...ursive.com>
Cc:	Per Olofsson <pelle@...ian.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11]: Hibernation: fix the number of pages used for hibernate/thaw buffering

On Sunday, April 22, 2012, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> 
> >On Sunday, April 22, 2012, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> >> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> >> 
> >> >On Wednesday, April 18, 2012, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> >> >> Per Olofsson <pelle@...ian.org> wrote:
> >> >> 
> >> >> >OK, let's say Reviewed-by then.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Reviewed-by: Per Olofsson <pelle@...ian.org>
> >> >> >
> >> >> 
> >> >> Rafael,
> >> >> 
> >> >> Anything you still need here?
> >> >
> >> >No, thanks, I'm going to apply the patch.
> >> >
> >> >Rafael
> >> 
> >> Any chance of it in 3.3.3?
> >
> >Nope.
> >
> >> Looks like rc1 of it is already out there...
> >
> >I'm going to push it for v3.5, so it will only appear in 3.4.y I guess.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Rafael
> 
> Don't understand why not. This is a fix for a regression in 3.2 and above.

Yes, in 3.2, so it is old enough.  If this were a regression in 3.3, I'd push
it for 3.4.

> Is there a new policy on regression fixes? I thought this should be queued
> for 3.4, 3.3 and 3.2. Otherwise, people will continue to see hangs in those
> versions.

Well, it was late for the 3.4 merge window and it wasn't clear whether or
not the patch was a regression fix at that time.  It is not very
straightforward and in my opinion it should be tested a bit wider before it
goes into -stable.

So as I said, v3.5 is the target with whatever -stable trees are relevant at
the time the patch is merged.

Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/