Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Roland McGrath <roland@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 18:27:49 -0700 (PDT)
In short, it doesn't smell like something I should apply under -rc9 rules.
Sorry, never said it was. 2.6.27 is just fine for this.
Since it has indeed been that way so long, I guess I figured
it was obvious this was not a last-minute-urgent sort of thing.
I figured Ingo would put it in one of his trees to be chewed on.
Aside from the test case, which I did indeed contrive after I
found the bug, and the general concern about races, I was only
bitten by this because it fouled up things for changes I'm
working on for .27 or later.
Thanks,
Roland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Roland McGrath
- Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Roland McGrath
- Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Roland McGrath
- Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- From: Linus Torvalds
- [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- Prev by Date: [PATCH 4/4] x86: remove ifdef CONFIG_SWIOTLB in pci-dma.c
- Next by Date: Re: ACPI Error under 2.6.26-rc*
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: fix delayed signals
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|