> On Apr 20, 2015, at 1:17 PM, Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 14:00:04 -0400 Chris Metcalf <cmetc...@ezchip.com> wrote:
>>
>> bitmap_parselist("", &mask, nmaskbits) will erroneously set bit
>> zero in the mask. The same bug is visible in cpumask_parselist()
>> since it is layered on top of the bitmask code, e.g. if you boot with
>> "isolcpus=", you will actually end up with cpu zero isolated.
>>
>> The bug was introduced in commit 4b060420a596 ("bitmap, irq: add
>> smp_affinity_list interface to /proc/irq") when bitmap_parselist()
>> was generalized to support userspace as well as kernelspace.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Metcalf <cmetc...@ezchip.com>
>> Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
>
> I don't think we need to backport a fix for a 4 year old bug which has
> very minor consequences. Am I wrong?
I don't have a strong feeling on this one. My guess is it's trivial to backport
but also very low impact so either way is pretty reasonable.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
