Am 26.08.2015 um 01:49 schrieb Michael Biebl: > Hi > > Am 26.08.2015 um 00:52 schrieb Faidon Liambotis: >> Hey, >> >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 06:21:20PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: >>> Any news about this? Can I help in any way? >> >> Are there any objections/holdups here? It'd be great if this made it to >> 8.2, the deadline for which is this weekend AIUI. Let me know if I can >> help! :) > > Can you poke upstream if it's safe to bump the timeout like this for v215. > > The commit message for b5338a reads: >> Some kernel modules still take more than one minute to insmod, we no >> longer rely on the timeout >> killing insmod within a given period of time, so just bump this to a >> much higher value. Its only >> purpose is to make sure that nothing stays aronud forever. > > "we no longer rely on the timeout killing insmod within a given period > of time" → does this apply for v215 as well?
I want to be sure that by bumping the default timeout, we don't have any side-effects and regress in other areas. Michael -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature