| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:08:40 -0700 From: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de> To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> Cc: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@...esas.com>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jirislaby@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] TTY: serial, fix locking imbalance On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 08:52:16PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 09/23/2011 12:46 AM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 09:24:56PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >> Commit "TTY: serial, move locking in uart_close" moved the lock, but > >> omitted to update branches which unlock the lock. Now they try to > >> unlock the lock without holding it. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> > >> --- > >> If possible, please, merge this into the patch mentioned above (it's > >> not upstream yet). > > > > I can't do that, > > Hmm, but what is the reason for that? I mean, why do you prefer a kernel > with broken history with respect to bisection? Per definition -next > doesn't mind rebases in subtrees. Or is this already in tty-linus branch > (I cannot check now, obviously)? Because it is in my tree and I can't rebase it as others depend on it (linux-next and others.) sorry, greg k-h -- 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