Greg KH wrote:
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 11:41:44AM -0500, Paul Fulghum wrote:
Chuck Ebbert wrote:
The cleaner fix looks more intrusive, though.
Is this simpler change (what I'm running but without the warning
messages) the preferred fix for -stable?
It fixes the problem.
So do you feel this patch should be added to the -stable kernel tree?
No. Now that I think about it, adding that extra
macro is just wrong even if temporary.
The real fix is equally simple, but in 2.6.18-rc
it is intertwined with other more intrusive changes.
Let me make a new separate patch that does things
the right way, which is simply removing the list
head while processing the list so two instances
to not trip over each other. I would have done so
earlier, but I've been insanely busy with multiple
work related deadlines (lame excuse I know).
I should post something tomorrow afternoon.
--
Paul Fulghum
Microgate Systems, Ltd.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
