An off-by-one bug in __iterator_load_balance causes it to erroneously
return NULL if the next task on the list is also the last entry in the
list. This patch corrects that fault.
David Newall wrote:
> An off-by-one bug in __iterator_load_balance causes it to erroneously
> return NULL if the next task on the list is also the last entry in the
> list. This patch corrects that fault.
>
Patch withdrawn. Who'd have thought 2.6.27.19 was so out of date?
* David Newall <[email protected]> wrote:
> David Newall wrote:
> > An off-by-one bug in __iterator_load_balance causes it to erroneously
> > return NULL if the next task on the list is also the last entry in the
> > list. This patch corrects that fault.
> >
>
> Patch withdrawn. Who'd have thought 2.6.27.19 was so out of date?
Yeah, the 2.6.27 -> latest-sched-devel distance is more than 250
commits already - that's a lot of commits for the scheduler
which is only 15 KLOC. Patches done on .27 are unlikely to apply
- and bugs are often fixed already.
Ingo