lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [ath5k-devel] [PATCH] ath5k : ath5k_config_interface deadlock fix
Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Bob Copeland napsal(a):
>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:03:37 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dave Young napsal(a):
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c, there's recursive locking of
>>>>>> sc->lock
>>>>>>
>>>>> Should be fixed already:
>>>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=bc05116ab33d30342e2b4b1bcc6d6e1184e9df97
>>>>>
>>>> I guess that didn't make it to -stable?
>>>>
>>> (cc stable!)
>>>
>> Not to worry, the commit that introduced it was
>> 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65, which as far as I can tell
>> came in after 2.6.26.
>>
>
> git-describe 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65
> v2.6.26-rc8-1219-g9d139c8
>
>
Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Bob Copeland napsal(a):
>
>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 01 Aug 2008 11:03:37 +0300 Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dave Young napsal(a):
>>>>>
>>>>>> In the drivers/net/wireless/ath5k/base.c, there's recursive locking of
>>>>>> sc->lock
>>>>>>
>>>>> Should be fixed already:
>>>>> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/linville/wireless-2.6.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=bc05116ab33d30342e2b4b1bcc6d6e1184e9df97
>>>>>
>>>> I guess that didn't make it to -stable?
>>>>
>>> (cc stable!)
>>>
>> Not to worry, the commit that introduced it was
>> 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65, which as far as I can tell
>> came in after 2.6.26.
>>
>
> git-describe 9d139c810a2aa17365cc548d0cd2a189d8433c65
> v2.6.26-rc8-1219-g9d139c8
>
Unfortunately git-describe can be misleading.

All this tells you is that the commit in question was based on (a
descendant of) v2.6.26-rc8. It doesn't tell you whether the patch is
present in v2.6.26.

There must be a better way (for efficient merges, right?). But all I
can think of is comparing the files in question against the diff. I
checked myself and the changes don't appear to have been included in
v2.6.26.

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-01 17:25    [W:0.422 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site