From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 29
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:27:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200807302127.42148.bzolnier@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080730021947.def99edc.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wednesday 30 July 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:06:50 +0200 Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> wrote:
>
> > * Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> [2008-07-29 21:48]:
> > > > Isn't this the opposite end of the same problem for which Bernhard
> > > > has been repeatedly trying to find a taker for his patch:
> > > >
> > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kexec/1882
> > >
> > > Yes. It's not the kobject patch at fault here, it's the use of kobjects
> > > so early in the boot process. That needs to be fixed.
>
> It was a bit optimistic to stick an unconditional GFP_KERNEL allocation
> into the previously-atomic kobject_init().
>
> It's only 128 bytes, so why can't we fix both problems thusly?
Fixes the bug for me (also true for previous patch from Bernhard).
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-30 19:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-07-29 7:23 linux-next: Tree for July 29 Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-29 7:48 ` Fernando Luis Vázquez Cao
2008-07-29 14:45 ` Dominik Brodowski
2008-08-03 14:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-04 7:58 ` Dominik Brodowski
2008-07-29 16:25 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2008-07-29 18:16 ` Greg KH
2008-07-29 20:49 ` Hugh Dickins
2008-07-30 4:48 ` Greg KH
2008-07-30 7:06 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-30 9:19 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-30 19:27 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2008-07-30 20:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-07-30 23:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-30 23:44 ` Greg KH
2008-08-07 1:08 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-08-07 3:40 ` Greg KH
2008-08-07 6:10 ` Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-30 1:05 ` linux-next: usb tree fix (Was: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 29) Stephen Rothwell
2008-07-30 19:38 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-07-29 7:36 linux-next: Tree for July 29 Stephen Rothwell
2010-07-29 4:32 Stephen Rothwell
2011-07-29 7:38 Stephen Rothwell
2011-07-30 11:38 ` Sedat Dilek
2011-07-30 16:08 ` Arnaud Lacombe
2011-07-30 16:16 ` Sedat Dilek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200807302127.42148.bzolnier@gmail.com \
--to=bzolnier@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bwalle@suse.de \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.