linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: cpu_alloc tree patch (Was: Re: next-20081106: undefined reference to `__per_cpu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0811191317120.23084@quilx.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2008 13:18:17 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
	Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: cpu_alloc tree patch (Was: Re: next-20081106:
 undefined reference to `__per_cpu_start')

On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> I have applied this to linux-next today.  It is not clear to me if this
> is a fix for the cpu_alloc tree or the zero-based per_cpu area patches or
> a combination of both.  If the first, please apply this to the cpu_alloc
> tree or I will have to drop the tree.  Otherwise, let me know where it
> belongs.

Its a fix to the cpu_alloc stuff.

> Also, considering the "discussions" between Rusty and yourself, I may
> need to drop the cpu_alloc tree until they are resolved.

Just came back from the conference. Hope I can catch up with email soon.

--
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/