[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:51:37 -0800
From: "Jeff Kirsher" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
To: "David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, frederik.deweerdt@...og.eu,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, zdenek.kabelac@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000e: fix double release of mutex
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 8:31 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:58:07 -0800
>
>> During a reset, releasing the swflag after it failed to be acquired would
>> cause a double unlock of the mutex. Instead, test whether acquisition of
>> the swflag was successful and if not, do not release the swflag. The reset
>> must still be done to bring the device to a quiescent state.
>>
>> This resolves [BUG 12200] BUG: bad unlock balance detected! e1000e
>> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12200
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
>
> If we're fixing a regression like this, you should make the
> patch against net-2.6, and this one is against net-next-2.6
>
> Please respin this for me, thanks Jeff.
> --
>
Doh! Sorry Dave. My bad, respinning now.
--
Cheers,
Jeff
--
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