From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752695Ab0FVWZv (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:25:51 -0400 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.139]:47475 "EHLO e9.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752422Ab0FVWZt (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:25:49 -0400 Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:25:47 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Miles Lane Subject: Re: [Bug #15863] 2.6.34-rc5-git7 (plus all patches) -- another suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. Message-ID: <20100622222547.GQ2290@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20100622211135.GO2290@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <201006222349.13096.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201006222349.13096.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:49:12PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, June 22, 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:34:25AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > > > of regressions introduced between 2.6.33 and 2.6.34. > > > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > > introduced between 2.6.33 and 2.6.34. Please verify if it still should > > > be listed and let the tracking team know (either way). > > > > We have been knocking these off as they appear. There is one or two > > that the relevant maintainers have been ignoring, but that always seems > > to be the case. ;-) > > > > Your choice as to whether you want to track the group... > > I think I'll simply leave that one bug open until all known instances have been > dealt with. > > Please let me know when that happens. :-) So if I am sufficiently forgetful, I can just ask you to close the bug immediately? Sorry, but you really couldn't expect me to pass up that kind of loophole! ;-) Thanx, Paul From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: [Bug #15863] 2.6.34-rc5-git7 (plus all patches) -- another suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:25:47 -0700 Message-ID: <20100622222547.GQ2290@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20100622211135.GO2290@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <201006222349.13096.rjw@sisk.pl> Reply-To: paulmck-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201006222349.13096.rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Maciej Rutecki , Miles Lane On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 11:49:12PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, June 22, 2010, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 12:34:25AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report > > > of regressions introduced between 2.6.33 and 2.6.34. > > > > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions > > > introduced between 2.6.33 and 2.6.34. Please verify if it still should > > > be listed and let the tracking team know (either way). > > > > We have been knocking these off as they appear. There is one or two > > that the relevant maintainers have been ignoring, but that always seems > > to be the case. ;-) > > > > Your choice as to whether you want to track the group... > > I think I'll simply leave that one bug open until all known instances have been > dealt with. > > Please let me know when that happens. :-) So if I am sufficiently forgetful, I can just ask you to close the bug immediately? Sorry, but you really couldn't expect me to pass up that kind of loophole! ;-) Thanx, Paul