[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzWGCO16v3NL7SqgBnQQrwpwCTvFZR=+3x89Hg0KzJtxg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:12:11 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Bruno Prémont <bonbons@...ux-vserver.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ilya Dryomov <ilya.dryomov@...tank.com>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 3.19-rc5
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 5:22 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 21, 2015 05:54:00 PM Peter Hurley wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, but the debug check is triggering worse behavior, requiring
>> bisecting back to the debug commit.
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> So I'm wondering is anyone is working on fixing this in any way?
>
> It kind of sucks when this is happening on an otherwise perfectly usable
> old(ish) machine ...
The WARN() was already changed to a WARN_ONCE().
So that debug check doesn't cause problems any more. If somebody is
bisecting something else, and the WARN() is a problem for those
intermediate kernels, then just disabling CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
should get you past that point.
IOW, this really shouldn't be an issue.
Does the pccard thing still not work?
Linus
--
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