From: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hrtimer, add expiry time overflow check in hrtimer_interrupt
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2013 17:43:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51787C18.1000408@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130425003548.GA16159@roeck-us.net>
On 04/24/2013 05:35 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 05:05:03PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>> On 04/24/2013 03:42 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 04:34:26PM -0400, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>>> On 04/08/2013 04:19 PM, John Stultz wrote:
>>>>> On 04/08/2013 05:47 AM, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
>>>>>> A simple check for an overflow can resolve this problem. Using KTIME_MAX
>>>>>> instead of the overflow value will result in the hrtimer function being run,
>>>>>> and the reprogramming of the timer after that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>>>>> Cc: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
>>>>> Prarit: Should this be tagged for -stable?
>>>> John,
>>>>
>>>> Yes, this should go to -stable. cc'd.
>>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am a bit surprised that this patch has not found its way into mainline yet,
>>> as everyone seems to agree that it is a candidate for -stable.
>> It just has to land upstream first, which is likely in the next week
>> or so when the 3.10 merge window opens. I'd have thought it would be
>> sooner but 3.9 is taking longer to close then I expected (and I
>> didn't think it was urgent enough to drop in at the last minute
>> before the 3.9 release was made).
>>
> Guess I am a bit lost in process.
>
> If this is going to be in -stable, it will presumably end up in 3.9.x as well as
> in earlier releases. So why wasn't it pushed into 3.9-rcX to start with ?
I usually only want to push changes to -rc6+ if they are really
critical, affecting lots of folks and fixing issues introduced in the
same cycle. By getting less critical fixes merged during a normal merge
window, then backporting them to affected -stable trees, we get better
test coverage and less chance for further bugs to be introduced at the
last minute before the release is made.
Its maybe a bit overly conservative, but I'm less and less into
late-night heroics these days. ;)
thanks
-john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-25 0:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1365425235-26191-1-git-send-email-prarit@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <5163264B.3050707@linaro.org>
2013-04-08 20:34 ` [PATCH] hrtimer, add expiry time overflow check in hrtimer_interrupt Prarit Bhargava
2013-04-08 20:38 ` John Stultz
2013-04-24 22:42 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-04-25 0:05 ` John Stultz
2013-04-25 0:35 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-04-25 0:43 ` John Stultz [this message]
2013-04-25 1:38 ` Li Zefan
2013-04-25 4:49 ` Guenter Roeck
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=51787C18.1000408@linaro.org \
--to=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox