On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 12:38:28PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 09:01:06AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:01:54PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > wrote:
> > > >> > >>
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 09:01:06AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:01:54PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > wrote:
> > >> > >> IOW I don't see why this got proposed for stable at all.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So,
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:01:54PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
> wrote:
> >> > >> IOW I don't see why this got proposed for stable at all.
> >> > >
> >> > > So, you suggest to just drop this patch for v3.8.3, don't you?
> >> >
> >> > I do,
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
wrote:
>> > >> IOW I don't see why this got proposed for stable at all.
>> > >
>> > > So, you suggest to just drop this patch for v3.8.3, don't you?
>> >
>> > I do, yes. But I'd suggest to get Konrad to agree.
>>
>> Yes. Lets drop it.
>
> Now
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
IOW I don't see why this got proposed for stable at all.
So, you suggest to just drop this patch for v3.8.3, don't you?
I do, yes. But I'd suggest to get Konrad to agree.
Yes. Lets drop it.
Now
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:01:54PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
IOW I don't see why this got proposed for stable at all.
So, you suggest to just drop this patch for v3.8.3, don't you?
I do,
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 09:01:06AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:01:54PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
IOW I don't see why this got proposed for stable at all.
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 12:38:28PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 09:01:06AM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:01:54PM +0200, William Dauchy wrote:
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 10:02:46AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 09:14:47AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 04.03.13 at 10:11, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >> >>> On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle wrote:
> >
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 10:02:46AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 09:14:47AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.03.13 at 10:11, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 09:14:47AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 04.03.13 at 10:11, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >>> On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle wrote:
> >> For one, a fix for the (indeed valid) compiler warning has been in
> >>
>>> On 04.03.13 at 10:11, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> For one, a fix for the (indeed valid) compiler warning has been in
>> Konrad's tree for several days
>>
>
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle wrote:
> For one, a fix for the (indeed valid) compiler warning has been in
> Konrad's tree for several days
>
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
For one, a fix for the (indeed valid) compiler warning has been in
Konrad's tree for several days
On 04.03.13 at 10:11, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
For one, a fix for the (indeed valid) compiler warning has been in
Konrad's tree for several days
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 09:14:47AM +, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 04.03.13 at 10:11, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 07:55 +, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
For one, a fix for the (indeed valid) compiler warning
>>> On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle wrote:
> Perhaps Konrad, Jan, Or Ian can tell whether the patch still needs to go
> in stable as is, because the problem it fixes is more severe than the
> problem it apparently creates. Maybe a mainline fix is needed before
> this can go in, or perhaps even a
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 11:20:02AM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:10 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:35 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > > 1) So if xen_vbd_translate() fails, it can return before setting
> > > preq.dev. That makes the call of pr_debug()
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:10 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:35 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> > 1) So if xen_vbd_translate() fails, it can return before setting
> > preq.dev. That makes the call of pr_debug() use an uninitialized value,
> > doesn't it?
>
> Oh yes, so it's a
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:10 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:35 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
1) So if xen_vbd_translate() fails, it can return before setting
preq.dev. That makes the call of pr_debug() use an uninitialized value,
doesn't it?
Oh yes, so it's a completely
On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 11:20:02AM +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:10 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:35 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
1) So if xen_vbd_translate() fails, it can return before setting
preq.dev. That makes the call of pr_debug() use an
On 03.03.13 at 11:20, Paul Bolle pebo...@tiscali.nl wrote:
Perhaps Konrad, Jan, Or Ian can tell whether the patch still needs to go
in stable as is, because the problem it fixes is more severe than the
problem it apparently creates. Maybe a mainline fix is needed before
this can go in, or
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:35 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
[...]
> 0) I've had another look at the relevant code in v3.8.2-rc1. It can be
> summarized like this:
>
> static int xen_vbd_translate()
> {
> [...]
> int rc = -EACCES;
>
> if ([...])
> goto out;
> [...]
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 19:48 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> When gcc compiles something like this:
>
> static int foo(int *p)
> {
> if (rand() & 1)
> return -1;
> *p = 0;
> return 0;
> }
>
> int bar(void)
> {
> int i;
> if (foo() < 0)
>
On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 22:12 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 11:44 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > 3.8-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > --
> >
> > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
> >
> > commit
On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 22:12 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 11:44 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
3.8-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com
commit
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 19:48 +, Ben Hutchings wrote:
When gcc compiles something like this:
static int foo(int *p)
{
if (rand() 1)
return -1;
*p = 0;
return 0;
}
int bar(void)
{
int i;
if (foo(i) 0)
return 1;
On Sat, 2013-03-02 at 23:35 +0100, Paul Bolle wrote:
[...]
0) I've had another look at the relevant code in v3.8.2-rc1. It can be
summarized like this:
static int xen_vbd_translate()
{
[...]
int rc = -EACCES;
if ([...])
goto out;
[...]
On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 11:44 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> 3.8-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>
> --
>
> From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
>
> commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63 upstream.
>
> The 'handle' is the device that
3.8-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63 upstream.
The 'handle' is the device that the request is from. For the life-time
of the ring we copy it from a request to
3.8-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com
commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63 upstream.
The 'handle' is the device that the request is from. For the life-time
of the ring we copy
On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 11:44 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
3.8-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
--
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk konrad.w...@oracle.com
commit 01c681d4c70d64cb72142a2823f27c4146a02e63 upstream.
The 'handle' is the
32 matches
Mail list logo
