[Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review

[Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review

Post by Willy Tarr » Sun, 15 Aug 2010 14:50:01



Greg, I confirm that 05fa199d45c fixes the warnings. I did not have them
in .51, got them with .52-rc1 and got rid of it with the patch above.

Regards,
Willy

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to XXXX@XXXXX.COM
More majordomo info at http://www.yqcomputer.com/
Please read the FAQ at http://www.yqcomputer.com/
 
 
 

[Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review

Post by Willy Tarr » Sun, 15 Aug 2010 14:50:01


Greg, I confirm that 05fa199d45c fixes the warnings. I did not have them
in .51, got them with .52-rc1 and got rid of it with the patch above.

Regards,
Willy

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to XXXX@XXXXX.COM
More majordomo info at http://www.yqcomputer.com/
Please read the FAQ at http://www.yqcomputer.com/

 
 
 

1. [stable] [Stable-review] [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review

2. [0/3] 2.6.27.52 stable review


We call that whole "expand_stack()" through handle_mm_fault(), and
that's _not_ called just for the process itself. So "current->mm" is
sometimes simply the wrong thing to use - like when you access the VM
of another process (during fork for the argument setup of the new VM,
or during ptrace etc).

Which is why I think commit 05fa199d45c should fix it. It makes the
stack expansion thing use the right mm. Which it just _happened_ to do
before, because it was always called just from the faulting code where
current->mm happened to be the right mm.

But I really don't know if there might be other issues lurking too.

Linus
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to XXXX@XXXXX.COM
More majordomo info at http://www.yqcomputer.com/
Please read the FAQ at http://www.yqcomputer.com/

3. [Stable-review] [00/97] 2.6.32.3 stable review

4. [Stable-review] [patch 000/108] 2.6.30-stable review

5. [Stable-review] [patch 00/71] 2.6.30.6-stable review

6. [patch][stable][stable-review] 2.6.31.4-rc2: Fix compile error

7. [patch 00/22] 2.6.27.7-stable review

8. [patch 00/48] 2.6.27.32-stable review

9. [patch 00/83] 2.6.27.9-stable review

10. [patch 00/27] 2.6.22-stable review

11. [00/11] 2.6.27.54-stable review

12. [stable] [patch 00/20] 2.6.22-stable review

13. [stable] [patch 00/67] 2.6.18-stable review

14. [stable] Next 2.6.17-stable review cycle will be starting in about 24 hours

15. [stable] [patch 00/32] 2.6.20-stable review