Re: [PATCH 3.9-stable] jfs: Several bugs in jfs_freeze() and jfs_unfreeze()

2013-06-05 Thread Greg KH
On Wed, Jun 05, 2013 at 08:27:42AM -0500, Dave Kleikamp wrote: > On 06/03/2013 09:15 PM, Jonghwan Choi wrote: > > This patch looks like it should be in the 3.9-stable tree, should we apply > > it? > > I'm kind of on the fence on this one. I believe the failure here was > triggered by induced error

Re: [PATCH 3.9-stable] jfs: Several bugs in jfs_freeze() and jfs_unfreeze()

2013-06-05 Thread Dave Kleikamp
On 06/03/2013 09:15 PM, Jonghwan Choi wrote: > This patch looks like it should be in the 3.9-stable tree, should we apply > it? I'm kind of on the fence on this one. I believe the failure here was triggered by induced errors to check the error paths. I'm not aware of a real-world crash due to the

[PATCH 3.9-stable] jfs: Several bugs in jfs_freeze() and jfs_unfreeze()

2013-06-03 Thread Jonghwan Choi
This patch looks like it should be in the 3.9-stable tree, should we apply it? -- From: "Vahram Martirosyan " commit e9b376671910d105c5e61103111b96209c729529 upstream The mentioned functions do not pay attention to the error codes returned by the functions updateSuper(), lmLogIn