[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190619170917.GC10107@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 19:09:17 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Raul Rangel <rrangel@...omium.org>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
djkurtz@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, zwisler@...omium.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Chris Boot <bootc@...tc.net>,
Clément Péron <peron.clem@...il.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [stable/4.14.y PATCH 0/3] mmc: Fix a potential resource leak
when shutting down request queue.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:46:25AM -0600, Raul Rangel wrote:
> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 11:19:34AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:55:18AM -0600, Raul E Rangel wrote:
> > > I think we should cherry-pick 41e3efd07d5a02c80f503e29d755aa1bbb4245de
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/856512/ into 4.14. It fixes a
> > > potential resource leak when shutting down the request queue.
> >
> > Potential meaning "it does happen", or "it can happen if we do this", or
> > just "maybe it might happen, we really do not know?"
> It does happen if the AMD SDHCI patches are cherry-picked into 4.14.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/1/398
Why are those patches somehow being required to be added to 4.14.y? If
they are not added, is all fine?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists