Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:40:35 +0200 | From | Ozan Çağlayan <> | Subject | Re: [stable] [00/29] 2.6.32.6 stable review |
| |
Thomas Gleixner wrote On 24-01-2010 18:29: > On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Andrew Morton wrote: > >> On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 16:11:45 -0800 Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote: >> >>> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 2.6.32.6 release. >>> There are 29 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to >>> this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let >>> us know. If anyone is a maintainer of the proper subsystem, and wants >>> to add a Signed-off-by: line to the patch, please respond with it. >>> >>> Responses should be made by Monday, January 24, 00:00:00 UTC. >>> Anything received after that time might be too late. >> 2.6.32.6 will still contain the regression described in (for example) >> >> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15117 >> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15005 >> >> It's fixed with the below revert which has been in -mm (and only in >> -mm) for ten days. >> >> I don't what's going on - perhaps we're waiting for Thomas, and he's >> otherwise engaged. There's a fix in the lkml thread "Re: [RFC PATCH >> 0/4] clockevents: fix clockevent_devices list corruption after cpu >> hotplug" to which Thomas replied >> >> I just applied your patch, but kept the cpuweight check. This >> is the least intrusive solution for now. The logic needs an >> overhaul, but thats neither rc4 nor stable material" > > Just sent the pull request for it. Sorry for the delay. The patch > needs to go into 32.6 as well.
tick-internal.h should be included for this to fix build failure. Already included in 2.6.33 with 8e1a928a2ed7e8.
Regards,
| |