Re: [2/2] 2.6.22-rc6: known regressions with patches

Re: [2/2] 2.6.22-rc6: known regressions with patches

[Michal Piotrowski]

Hi all,

Here is a list of some known regressions in 2.6.22-rc6
with patches available.

Feel free to add new regressions/remove fixed etc.
http://kernelnewbies.org/known_regressions

*STATISTICS* (a.k.a. list of aces)

Name                    Regressions fixed since 21-Jun-2007
Andi Kleen                             1
Hugh Dickins                           1
Jean Delvare                           1



FBDEV

Subject    : mach64 breakage in 2.6.22
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/14/73
Submitter  : Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Handled-By : Ville Syrjälä <syrjala@sci.fi>
Patch      : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/21/216
Status     : patch was suggested



Memory management

Subject    : bug in i386 MTRR initialization
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/19/93
Submitter  : Andrea Righi <righiandr@users.sourceforge.net>
Status     : patch available



Networking

Subject    : ERROR: "__ucmpdi2" [drivers/net/s2io.ko] undefined!
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/19/310
Submitter  : Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de>
Patch      : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/19/382
Status     : patch was suggested

Subject    : no irda0 interface (2.6.21 was OK), smsc does not find chip
References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/3/16
Submitter  : Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@mail.ru>
Handled-By : Samuel Ortiz <samuel@sortiz.org>
             Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Patch      : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/6/7/237
Status     : patch was suggested



Regards,
Michal

--
LOG
http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/log/

Re: [2/2] 2.6.22-rc6: known regressions with patches

[Linus Torvalds]

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote:
> 
> Memory management
> 
> Subject    : bug in i386 MTRR initialization
> References : http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/19/93
> Submitter  : Andrea Righi <righiandr-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>
> Status     : patch available

This one wasn't a bug in the first place, it was just the regular warning 
for kmalloc-size-0. The "BUG" string was confusing and has been fixed, and 
the warning for size-0 has gone away and been replaced by returning a 
pointer that will fault on dereference instead.

So please remove this one.

		Linus