[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120906001841.GA7433@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 17:18:41 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya.rohm@...il.com>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pch_uart: Add eg20t_port lock field, avoid recursive
spinlocks
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:14:48PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 05:04:07PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> > The following patch has been included in linux-next
> > (fe89def79c48e2149abdd1e816523e69a9067191) but has not yet landed in mainline
> > nor been queued for stable so far as I can determine. This patch addresses a
> > deadlock in mainline and is a prerequisite for an additional fix required by the
> > PREEMPT_RT kernel. Can we get this pulled into 3.4.11 please?
>
> 3.4.11? It has to hit Linus's tree first.
>
> > Perhaps I am
> > jumping the gun, but this patch was originally pulled on June 19, 2012.
>
> Remember, we missed a pull cycle for tty due to other problems, I
> thought I picked all of the different pieces needed for 3.6, but I must
> of missed this one.
Nope, it made it, it is commit 2588aba002d14e938c2f56d299ecf3e7ce1302a5.
Now, do you want that patch in the -stable releases? If so, how far
back? :)
Sorry for the mess,
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