On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 11:53:38AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > Ok, that's fine, but can you send some patches that I can apply? :)
>
> The patches you've already queued for stable are all that's needed.
> Including the xfs one, despite Andi's reservations about it; Dav
Greg KH wrote:
> Ok, that's fine, but can you send some patches that I can apply? :)
The patches you've already queued for stable are all that's needed.
Including the xfs one, despite Andi's reservations about it; Dave
Chinner has a better fix, but as far as I know he hasn't submitted it
for sta
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:40:50AM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > These don't apply now due to the x86 merge. Care to backport them and
> > send them to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] address so we can apply them
> > properly?
>
> I'm a bit confused. The patches you mailed out are
Greg KH wrote:
> These don't apply now due to the x86 merge. Care to backport them and
> send them to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] address so we can apply them
> properly?
I'm a bit confused. The patches you mailed out are against arch/i386.
Won't they apply to the stable tree as-is?
> Although, it's
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 12:53:33AM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > > Subject: [PATCH 12/12] xfs: eagerly remove vmap mappings to avoid
> > > upsetting Xen
>
> This patch was the wrong fix anyways as discussed; David Chinner
> finally came up with a better one.
Ok, that's good to know, if someone
> > Subject: [PATCH 12/12] xfs: eagerly remove vmap mappings to avoid
> > upsetting Xen
This patch was the wrong fix anyways as discussed; David Chinner
finally came up with a better one.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 02:59:50PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > Yeah, but you cc:ed all 12 patches to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The majority of
> > which we
> > don't want to take, right? Which specific ones should stable@ care
> > about?
>
> Crap, sorry about that. I'd just
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 00:03 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Subject: [PATCH 12/12] xfs: eagerly remove vmap mappings to avoid
> > upsetting Xen
>
> This should be probably done unconditionally because it's a undefined
> dangerous condition everywhere.
Should be done unconditionally. One could remap
> Subject: [PATCH 12/12] xfs: eagerly remove vmap mappings to avoid
> upsetting Xen
This should be probably done unconditionally because it's a undefined
dangerous condition everywhere.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [E
Greg KH wrote:
> Yeah, but you cc:ed all 12 patches to [EMAIL PROTECTED] The majority of
> which we
> don't want to take, right? Which specific ones should stable@ care
> about?
Crap, sorry about that. I'd just intended to send the overview and the
four patches, which have explicit CC: stable
On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 01:48:40PM -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Hi Linus,
>
> Here's a set of patches to update paravirt_ops and Xen for 2.6.24
>
> A quick overview of the patchset:
>
> paravirt_ops:
> Remove the monolithic paravirt_ops structure, and replace it with
> smaller
Hi Linus,
Here's a set of patches to update paravirt_ops and Xen for 2.6.24
A quick overview of the patchset:
paravirt_ops:
Remove the monolithic paravirt_ops structure, and replace it with
smaller structures of related functions. Also, clean up the handling
of lazy mode
12 matches
Mail list logo
