linux-kernel - Re: + pm-convert-wakeup-flag-accessors-to-inline-functions-fix.patch added to -mm tree

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]

Message-Id: <200803192255.29655.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date:	Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:55:28 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lenb@...nel.org
Subject: Re: + pm-convert-wakeup-flag-accessors-to-inline-functions-fix.patch added to -mm tree

On Wednesday, 19 of March 2008, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Mar 2008, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:48:29AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > I'll drop everything, let's start again.
> > > 
> > > Only how?  umm, please review Greg's driver tree, let us know which patches
> > > shoudl be dropped from that then send new ones, I guess.
> > 
> > Yes, please do, I'm confused as well :)
> 
> Okay.  No doubt Rafael will correct me if I get something wrong.
> 
> Greg's tree still contains the original, wrong version of 
> pm-make-wakeup-flags-available-whenever-config_pm-is-set.patch.  It 
> should be reverted.  In its place should be substituted this series of 
> patches (URLs for 0/3 ... 3/3):
> 
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120561808422302&w=2
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120561808522316&w=2
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120561808522322&w=2
> 	http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120561808622328&w=2
> 
> There is likely to be a conflict in applying the 2/3 patch, because its 
> first hunk touches a region of code also affected by work Rafael has 
> been doing.  The important aspect of that hunk is that it moves the 
> should_wakeup flag definition outside the region protected by "#ifdef 
> CONFIG_PM_SLEEP".

I've just resent the three patches, rebased on top of the current tree.

Please double check if everytning is right.

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/