2.6.27-rc4-git1: Reported regressions from 2.6.26 - Kernel

This is a discussion on 2.6.27-rc4-git1: Reported regressions from 2.6.26 - Kernel ; This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report of recent regressions. The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 221

Thread: 2.6.27-rc4-git1: Reported regressions from 2.6.26

  1. [Bug #11379] char/tpm: tpm_infineon no longer loaded for HP 2510p laptop

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11379
    Subject : char/tpm: tpm_infineon no longer loaded for HP 2510p laptop
    Submitter : Frans Pop
    Date : 2008-08-18 13:40 (6 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121906698213329&w=4
    Handled-By : Bjorn Helgaas


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  2. [Bug #11355] Regression in 2.6.27-rc2 when cross-building the kernel

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11355
    Subject : Regression in 2.6.27-rc2 when cross-building the kernel
    Submitter : Larry Finger
    Date : 2008-08-16 2:38 (8 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121885432118368&w=4


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  3. [Bug #11410] SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock...

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11410
    Subject : SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock...
    Submitter : Daniel J Blueman
    Date : 2008-08-22 21:48 (2 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121944176609042&w=4


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  4. [Bug #11354] AMD Elan regression with 2.6.27-rc3

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11354
    Subject : AMD Elan regression with 2.6.27-rc3
    Submitter : Sean Young
    Date : 2008-08-15 18:37 (9 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121882578430056&w=4


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  5. [Bug #11382] e1000e: 2.6.27-rc1 corrupts EEPROM/NVM

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11382
    Subject : e1000e: 2.6.27-rc1 corrupts EEPROM/NVM
    Submitter : David Vrabel
    Date : 2008-08-08 10:47 (16 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121819267211679&w=4


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  6. [Bug #11414] Random crashes with 2.6.27-rc3 on PPC

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11414
    Subject : Random crashes with 2.6.27-rc3 on PPC
    Submitter : Michael Buesch
    Date : 2008-08-23 14:10 (1 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121950076812616&w=4


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  7. [Bug #11358] net: forcedeth call restore mac addr in nv_shutdown path

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11358
    Subject : net: forcedeth call restore mac addr in nv_shutdown path
    Submitter : Yinghai Lu
    Date : 2008-08-17 3:30 (7 days old)
    References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121894389018584&w=4
    Handled-By : Yinghai Lu
    Patch : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121894389018584&w=4


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  8. [Bug #11388] 2.6.27-rc3 warns about MTRR range; only 3 of 16gb of memory is usable

    This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    of recent regressions.

    The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    (either way).


    Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11388
    Subject : 2.6.27-rc3 warns about MTRR range; only 3 of 16gb of memory is usable
    Submitter : Joshua Hoblitt
    Date : 2008-08-20 17:38 (4 days old)


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  9. Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected



    On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    >
    > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    > (either way).
    >
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11342
    > Subject : Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected
    > Submitter : Alan D. Brunelle
    > Date : 2008-08-13 23:03 (11 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121866876027629&w=4
    > Handled-By : Andrew Morton


    This one makes no sense. It's triggering a BUG_ON(in_interrupt()), but
    then the call chain shows that there is no interrupt going on.

    Also, the bisection is senseless - there's a trivial change wrt
    "do_one_initcall()" that got merged, but everything else is trivial about
    lguest and has nothing to do with the whole CPU-init thing. But if it was
    that initcall one, then "git bisect" woul have pointed to it, not the
    merge. And the merge itself had no conflicts or anything else going on..

    The fact that it came and went later also implies that it's probably just
    some timing-dependent thing or some subtle memory corruption, making the
    bisection result even less likely to be exact.

    But I'm adding Arjan and Rusty to the Cc, because that merge was takign
    Rusty's branch, and the "do_one_initcall()" is Arjan's commit. Since
    undoing that merge apparently does fix it, I'm wondering if something
    there just does end up triggering the problem.

    The do_one_commit() thing _is_ in the path of sys_init_module(), so it
    _is_ at least somewhat relevant from an oops standpoint.

    One thing the "do_one_commit()" thing does is to put more pressure on the
    stack due to that whole buffer for the printk's going on.

    Alan, can you try
    - seeing how consistent it is with one kernel (ie boot a known-bad kernel
    a few times just to see if it really is 100% consistent)
    - try enabling 'initcall_debug' on the kernel command line, to (a) see
    the new code actually do something and (b) see what it is actually
    calling just before.

    Hmm..

    Linus
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  10. Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected



    On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >
    > This one makes no sense. It's triggering a BUG_ON(in_interrupt()), but
    > then the call chain shows that there is no interrupt going on.


    Ahh, later in that thread there's another totally unrelated oops in
    debug_mutex_add_waiter().

    I'd guess that it is really wild pointer corrupting memory, quite possibly
    due to a double free or something like that. Alan - it would be good to
    run with DEBUG_PAGE_ALLOC and SLUB debugging etc if you don't already do
    that?

    Linus
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  11. Re: [Bug #11342] Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected

    Linus Torvalds wrote:
    >
    > On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    >> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    >> from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    >> (either way).
    >>
    >>
    >> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11342
    >> Subject : Linux 2.6.27-rc3: kernel BUG at mm/vmalloc.c - bisected
    >> Submitter : Alan D. Brunelle
    >> Date : 2008-08-13 23:03 (11 days old)
    >> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121866876027629&w=4
    >> Handled-By : Andrew Morton

    >
    > This one makes no sense. It's triggering a BUG_ON(in_interrupt()), but
    > then the call chain shows that there is no interrupt going on.
    >
    > Also, the bisection is senseless - there's a trivial change wrt
    > "do_one_initcall()" that got merged, but everything else is trivial about
    > lguest and has nothing to do with the whole CPU-init thing. But if it was
    > that initcall one, then "git bisect" woul have pointed to it, not the
    > merge. And the merge itself had no conflicts or anything else going on..
    >
    > The fact that it came and went later also implies that it's probably just
    > some timing-dependent thing or some subtle memory corruption, making the
    > bisection result even less likely to be exact.
    >
    > But I'm adding Arjan and Rusty to the Cc, because that merge was takign
    > Rusty's branch, and the "do_one_initcall()" is Arjan's commit. Since
    > undoing that merge apparently does fix it, I'm wondering if something
    > there just does end up triggering the problem.
    >
    > The do_one_commit() thing _is_ in the path of sys_init_module(), so it
    > _is_ at least somewhat relevant from an oops standpoint.
    >
    > One thing the "do_one_commit()" thing does is to put more pressure on the
    > stack due to that whole buffer for the printk's going on.


    but it's 64 bit.. with 8Kb stack and separate irq stacks. I'd be surprised if we blow that this easily.
    the trace is a tad long with a long ACPI call chain.

    Wonder what gcc is in use?
    (newer ones tend to be a ton better... but maybe Alex is using a really old one)
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  12. Re: [Bug #11271] BUG: fealnx in 2.6.27-rc1

    Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    > of recent regressions.
    >
    > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    > (either way).
    >
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11271
    > Subject : BUG: fealnx in 2.6.27-rc1
    > Submitter : Jaswinder Singh
    > Date : 2008-08-05 14:58 (19 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=121794762016830&w=4
    > http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/8/10/98
    > Handled-By : Francois Romieu



    Jaswinder, does reverting 28cd4289abc2c8db90344ee4ff064a9bdf086fdf help?

    That's the only material change to fealnx itself in years.

    If not, any chance you could bisect this problem, and add more info to
    the bug?

    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  13. Re: [Bug #11210] libata badness

    Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    > of recent regressions.
    >
    > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    > (either way).
    >
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11210
    > Subject : libata badness
    > Submitter : Kumar Gala
    > Date : 2008-07-31 18:53 (24 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-ide&m=121753059307310&w=4
    > Handled-By : Ben Dooks



    FWIW,

    http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121754161727539&w=4

    So IMO handled-by is Kumar?

    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  14. Re: [Bug #11343] SATA Cold Boot Problems with 2.6.27-rc[23] on nVidia 680i

    Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    > of recent regressions.
    >
    > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    > (either way).
    >
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11343
    > Subject : SATA Cold Boot Problems with 2.6.27-rc[23] on nVidia 680i
    > Submitter : Manny Maxwell
    > Date : 2008-08-14 4:16 (10 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121868782917600&w=4



    hmmmm. Looking at changes between the two csets listed in the email
    (623fa57..8f616cd), all of them are driver-specific and unrelated to
    Manny's hardware except for

    commit 2486fa561a3192bbbec39c7feef87a1e07bd6342
    Author: Tejun Heo
    Date: Thu Jul 31 07:52:40 2008 +0900

    libata: update atapi disable handling

    So you could try to revert that and see what happens. But given that
    small range of changes, it really seems like something else, maybe in
    the PCI subsystem (random guess).

    Looking at the entire kernel, nothing jumps out, either. Its mostly fs
    updates (ext4, xfs), a networking update, an ARM update, and a libata
    update.

    Also, some reset-related fixes just went in, so re-testing the latest
    -git would be helpful as well.

    Jeff



    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  15. Re: [Bug #11356] Linux 2.6.27-rc3 - build failure: undefined reference to `.lockdep_count_forward_deps'

    On Saturday 23 August 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11356
    > Subject : Linux 2.6.27-rc3 - build failure: undefined reference to
    > `.lockdep_count_forward_deps'
    > Submitter : Frans Pop
    > Date : 2008-08-16 19:11 (8 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121891396320127&w=4


    Fixed as per: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121898767530602&w=4
    Adrian mentioned that he'd closed the bug, but apparently not.
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  16. Re: [Bug #11379] char/tpm: tpm_infineon no longer loaded for HP 2510p laptop

    On Saturday 23 August 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11379
    > Subject : char/tpm: tpm_infineon no longer loaded for HP 2510p laptop
    > Submitter : Frans Pop
    > Date : 2008-08-18 13:40 (6 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121906698213329&w=4
    > Handled-By : Bjorn Helgaas


    Fixed with:
    commit 5e4c6564c95ce127beeefe75e15cd11c93487436
    Author: Kay Sievers
    Date: Thu Aug 21 15:28:56 2008 +0200

    pnp: fix "add acpi:* modalias entries"
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  17. Re: [Bug #11334] myri10ge: use ioremap_wc: compilation failure on ARM

    * Rafael J. Wysocki [2008-08-23 20:10]:
    > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
    > of recent regressions.
    >
    > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
    > from 2.6.26. Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
    > (either way).


    Yes, this is still there.
    --
    Martin Michlmayr
    http://www.cyrius.com/
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  18. Re: 2.6.27-rc4-git1: Reported regressions from 2.6.26



    On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11405
    > Subject : 2.6.27-rc3 segfault on cold boot; not on warm boot.
    > Submitter : David Greaves
    > Date : 2008-08-21 9:45 (3 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121931198904777&w=4


    It would be good to have some kind of bisection of this one, because it
    looks pretty odd. Also, google doesn't find anybody else seeing that
    "segfault at ffffffbf", even though it seems to be very consistent for
    David. So I don't think we'll be able to even _guess_ where it is without
    some more information about exactly when it started happening.

    Since it's present in 2.6.26 too, it's clearly not a regression from that
    one, but perhaps more importantly, since it's apparently an old one I'd
    have expected more reports like this if it was some common problem. And
    the warm-vs-cold-boot thing makes me think it's some hardware setup issue.

    Possibly the disk controller, possibly the CPU (eg some MTRR/PAT
    setup issue or TLB thing). But the dmesg's are all from late enough at
    boot that I can't even tell what disk controller it is (except that it is
    SATA), nor can I tell what CPU it is.

    But again, if it was some MTRR/PAT issue, I'd expect a _lot_ more reports
    of this.

    MD/XFS sounds unlikely, since they should have absolutely nothing that
    could possibly matter for cold/hot boot.

    Linus
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  19. Re: 2.6.27-rc4-git1: Reported regressions from 2.6.26



    On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11410
    > Subject : SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock...
    > Submitter : Daniel J Blueman
    > Date : 2008-08-22 21:48 (2 days old)
    > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121944176609042&w=4


    This one now has a suggested patch for Daniel to try from Vegard, but no
    reply yet:

    http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121946972307110&w=4

    Vegard, I think your patch is a bit odd, though. The result of your patch
    is

    - first loop:

    hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &db->list, node) {
    hlist_del(&obj->node);
    hlist_add_head(&obj->node, &freelist);
    }

    and quite frankly, I don't see what the difference between that and a
    something like a simple

    struct hlist_node *first = bd->list.first;
    if (first) {
    bd->list.first = NULL;
    first->pprev = &first;
    }

    really is?

    I dunno. We don't have list splicing ops for the hlist things.

    Linus
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  20. Re: 2.6.27-rc4-git1: Reported regressions from 2.6.26



    On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    >
    > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11401
    > Subject : pktcdvd: BUG, NULL pointer dereference in pkt_ioctl, bisected
    > Submitter : Laurent Riffard
    > Date : 2008-08-22 08:16 (2 days old)


    This one looks irritating.

    It's bisected to 5b6155ee70e9c4d2ad7e6f514c8eee06e2711c3a ("pktcdvd: push
    BKL down into driver"), but the problem goes deeper than that.

    The "unlocked" ioctl's do not get a "struct inode *" pointer, they _only_
    get the "struct file *". And this is very much historical usage, where
    some internal functions only passed in the inode (good or not, whatever).

    And ioctl_by_bdev() doesn't have a "struct file *" and has depended on
    passing in a NUMM "struct file *" and its own "struct inode *", and
    expects the ioctl's to just use that instead. But the unlocked ioctl just
    drops it on the floor, and uses just the (unusable) file pointer.

    Grr.

    And some other cases (like pkt_ioctl() itself) that simply pass in a
    _different_ inode than the file itself is attached to. It does

    blkdev_ioctl(pd->bdev->bd_inode, file, cmd, arg);

    where "file" points to the pkt_ioctl thing, but "inode" points to the
    inode "behind" the pkt interface.

    Double grr.

    I really think the only sane model is to literally make "unlocked_ioctl()"
    have the same calling convention as the old "ioctl()" thing had, and pass
    in both file * and inode *. It was a stupid "cleanup" to try to have a
    simpler interface for the unlocked version. Having two different models,
    where we have actually _depended_ on the old model and then are trying to
    convert to a (weaker) new model, is not a good idea.

    The alternative is to do this _only_ for the blkdev_ioctl's, and have
    those only take the "inode *", and then create a new fake "struct file *"
    to go with it, regardless of what "struct file" was passed in (exactly
    because the blockdev ones really think that the inode is the important
    part).

    Hmm?

    We need to fix this.

    Linus
    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast