linux-kernel - Re: Linux 3.1-rc9

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: <20111008005035.GC22843@hostway.ca>
Date:	Fri, 7 Oct 2011 17:50:36 -0700
From:	Simon Kirby <sim@...tway.ca>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.1-rc9

On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 08:01:55PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> @@ -2571,6 +2573,7 @@ void thread_group_cputimer(struct task_struct *tsk, struct task_cputime *times);
>  static inline void thread_group_cputime_init(struct signal_struct *sig)
>  {
>  	raw_spin_lock_init(&sig->cputimer.lock);
> +	raw_spin_lock_init(&sig->cputimer.runtime_lock);

My 3.1-rc9 tree has just spin_lock_init() here, not raw_*.

Which tree is your patch against? -next or something?

It applies with some cooking like this, but will it be right?

> sed s/raw_// ../sched-patch-noraw.diff | patch -p1 --dry
patching file include/linux/sched.h
Hunk #1 succeeded at 503 (offset -1 lines).
Hunk #2 succeeded at 512 (offset -1 lines).
Hunk #3 succeeded at 2568 (offset -5 lines).
patching file kernel/posix-cpu-timers.c
patching file kernel/sched_stats.h

Simon-
--
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/