[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c440811081413v58ffb2fah90849e7aa26cc67f@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 14:13:53 -0800
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Kumar Gala" <galak@...nel.crashing.org>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] irq: Maintain user set affinity
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 1:35 PM, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 10:31:05 -0600 (CST)
> Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
>> >From 819ad3ed4660f4238e053728a8b5aa93d22b13d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Kumar Gala <galak@...nel.crashing.org>
>> Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 10:13:53 -0600
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] irq: Maintain user set affinity
>>
>> This addresses a regression in that if a user specified an affinity
>> for an interrupt that affinity information would get reset between
>> a request_irq(), free_irq() and request_irq() for the same irq.
>>
...
>
> Are you able to identify when this regression occurred? It isn't
> immediately obvious to me.
>
> If the regression is present in 2.6.27 or earlier, do you think we
> should backport the fix? If so, a different patch would be needed due
> to the presence of
it seems that is not a regression...
YH
--
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