[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48932A10.8080004@tuffmail.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 16:21:52 +0100
From: Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>
To: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com>
CC: Bob Copeland <me@...copeland.com>, tomasw@...il.com,
Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>, stable@...nel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linville@...driver.com, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
ath5k-devel@...ema.h4ckr.net, johannes@...solutions.net,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] [PATCH] ath5k : ath5k_config_interface deadlock
fix
Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Bob Copeland napsal(a):
>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:03:37 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dave Young napsal(a):
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c, there's recursive locking of
>>>>>> sc->lock
>>>>>>
>>>>> Should be fixed already:
>>>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=bc05116ab33d30342e2b4b1bcc6d6e1184e9df97
>>>>>
>>>> I guess that didn't make it to -stable?
>>>>
>>> (cc stable!)
>>>
>> Not to worry, the commit that introduced it was
>> 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65, which as far as I can tell
>> came in after 2.6.26.
>>
>
> git-describe 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65
> v2.6.26-rc8-1219-g9d139c8
>
>
Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Bob Copeland napsal(a):
>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:03:37 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dave Young napsal(a):
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c, there's recursive locking of
>>>>>> sc->lock
>>>>>>
>>>>> Should be fixed already:
>>>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=bc05116ab33d30342e2b4b1bcc6d6e1184e9df97
>>>>>
>>>> I guess that didn't make it to -stable?
>>>>
>>> (cc stable!)
>>>
>> Not to worry, the commit that introduced it was
>> 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65, which as far as I can tell
>> came in after 2.6.26.
>>
>
> git-describe 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65
> v2.6.26-rc8-1219-g9d139c8
>
Unfortunately git-describe can be misleading.
All this tells you is that the commit in question was based on (a
descendant of) v2.6.26-rc8. It doesn't tell you whether the patch is
present in v2.6.26.
There must be a better way (for efficient merges, right?). But all I
can think of is comparing the files in question against the diff. I
checked myself and the changes don't appear to have been included in
v2.6.26.
Alan
--
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