[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100901173253.GC23357@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 19:32:53 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
kvm-devel <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ftrace/perf_event leak
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 14:15 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > Thanks for fixing this.
> >
> > However, can we split this in two patches to ease the backport?
> >
> > The lack of a module_put() after perf_trace_init() failure is there for a while
> > (the backport needs to start in 2.6.32).
> >
> > But the lack of a module_put in the destroy path needs a .35 backport only.
>
> I don't think it really needs two patches. Just notify stable (and
> Greg KH in particular) about the backport requirements. Greg can
> handle it ;)
Well, Greg certainly has more than enough to handle, so if there's
different chunks with different -stable vectors then it would be most
helpful to him to split things up!
Manually trying to split up patches is both error-prone and
stress-inducing.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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