linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the sparc tree

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20110520121802.f0bf0fea.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:	Fri, 20 May 2011 12:18:02 +1000
From:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:	Daniel Hellstrom <daniel@...sler.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the sparc tree

Hi Daniel,

On Thu, 19 May 2011 15:37:59 +0200 Daniel Hellstrom <daniel@...sler.com> wrote:
>
> I looked at linux-next and I think the call to the scheduler_ipi is 
> missing in the resched interrupt routine. I believe that the below patch 
> should be applied ontop of linux-next. Could you include it in the merge 
> or what do you suggest I do?

That patch (if correct) needs to be applied to some tree, linux-next just
takes what it is given.  That patch is really beyond a merge fix as that
code exists on neither tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped