[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: linux-next requirements (Was: Re: [tip:x86/ptrace] ptrace: Add support for generic PTRACE_GETREGSET/PTRACE_SETREGSET)
Hi Peter,

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 14:57:28 -0800 "H. Peter Anvin" <> wrote:
> Either which way, Roland has a mitigation patch -- which basically
> disables the broken bits of PARISC until the PARISC maintainers fix it.
> What is the best way to handle that kind of stuff?

Well, now that Roland has made at least one of the PARISC maintainers
aware of the problem, we could wait a little while to see if a solution
is forthcoming from them. If not, then maybe Roland's patch could be
applied to the appropriate tip tree or we could just leave PARISC broken
in linux-next until they decide to fix it. Note that some of the PARISC
builds are already broken in linux-next for other reasons.

Are there any downsides to Roland's patch as far as PARISC is concerned
(apart from the loss of some functionality, of course)?
Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-02-23 01:03    [W:0.089 / U:2.872 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site