Re: Why is this patch not in 2.6.22-rc5?

From: Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:52:14 -0400 > Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:36:30 -0700 > > Jay Vosburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>The following patch (based on a patch from Stephen Hemminger > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) removes use

Re: Why is this patch not in 2.6.22-rc5?

Stephen Hemminger wrote: On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:36:30 -0700 Jay Vosburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The following patch (based on a patch from Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) removes use after free conditions in the unregister path for the bonding master. Without this patch, an

Why is this patch not in 2.6.22-rc5?

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:36:30 -0700 Jay Vosburgh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The following patch (based on a patch from Stephen Hemminger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) removes use after free conditions in > the unregister path for the bonding master. Without this patch, an > operation of the

Why is this patch not in 2.6.22-rc5?

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:36:30 -0700 Jay Vosburgh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The following patch (based on a patch from Stephen Hemminger [EMAIL PROTECTED]) removes use after free conditions in the unregister path for the bonding master. Without this patch, an operation of the form echo

Re: Why is this patch not in 2.6.22-rc5?

Stephen Hemminger wrote: On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:36:30 -0700 Jay Vosburgh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The following patch (based on a patch from Stephen Hemminger [EMAIL PROTECTED]) removes use after free conditions in the unregister path for the bonding master. Without this patch, an

Re: Why is this patch not in 2.6.22-rc5?

From: Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:52:14 -0400 Stephen Hemminger wrote: On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 21:36:30 -0700 Jay Vosburgh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The following patch (based on a patch from Stephen Hemminger [EMAIL PROTECTED]) removes use after free