On Fri, 2012-06-22 at 19:21 +0300, Touko Korpela wrote:
> Greg KH wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 10:59:48AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > Hi Greg,
> > > 
> > > 3.3-stable pulled in upstream commit
> > > 6f94a4c45a6f744383f9f695dde019998db3df55 (dm thin: fix stacked bi_next
> > > usage)
> > > 
> > > But later in the 3.4 development window it was determined that that
> > > commit introduced a significant leak.  The following upstream commit
> > > fixes it (but unfortunately didn't cc: stable).
> >
> > 3.3 is end-of-life, so there's not much I can do with the 3.3-stable
> > tree anymore, sorry.  If there's any other tree I should apply this to
> > that is active (i.e. 3.0 or 3.4), please let me know.
> 
> Looks like you forgot 3.2 that is affected (since 3.2.14).

I've added this to the queue for 3.2, thanks.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Lowery's Law:
             If it jams, force it. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway.