[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200803312231.08003.rjw@sisk.pl>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 22:31:07 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
To: Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Natalie Protasevich <protasnb@...il.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc7-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.24
On Monday, 31 of March 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 03:24:10PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 01:48:15PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> >>> Rafael,
> >>>
> >>> Add this one to the list?
> >>
> >>
> >> That's not a regression from 2.6.24
> > ..
> >
> > 2.6.24 does not flood my syslog with those messages.
> > 2.6.25-rc* does. Looks like a regression.
> >
> > The original bug was a hidden regression in 2.6.23,
> > which nobody bothered to identify until now.
>
> Let's try to get this patch into Linus' tree without arguing
> whether it might be called a post 2.6.24 regression or not. ;)
>
> > Just because some code "gets away with" a regression
> > for a kernel or two, doesn't mean that regression shouldn't be fixed.
>
> No disagreement on this one.
>
> We already have over 200 known (and many more once reported) regressions
> in the kernel, and all of them should be fixed...
The patch have already been merged, BTW.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists