Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756866AbYG3Tqn (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754754AbYG3TqK (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:10 -0400 Received: from fk-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.128.185]:4535 "EHLO fk-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754466AbYG3TqH (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:46:07 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:message-id; b=GbMCsqboY8mPLzk6I0/E6AbkTCVUEk8LG8jSARicPD+U0qICTXTIcQ2CqSC/HrXAqN WruaEr9ABcVgw/uJkp3mTpDd49PJ5dzfaDUSA8r1ViVTQizpD9SmHsoBC/xSoqS/lwI8 Krpw1mgVryHdy5fMNuRSEVlx5xICsofqcpo9Q= From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for July 29 Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:27:41 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: Bernhard Walle , Greg KH , Hugh Dickins , Greg KH , Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Dave Hansen References: <20080729172337.b3d74100.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20080730090650.79a5a749@kopernikus.site> <20080730021947.def99edc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080730021947.def99edc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807302127.42148.bzolnier@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1050 Lines: 25 On Wednesday 30 July 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:06:50 +0200 Bernhard Walle wrote: > > > * Greg KH [2008-07-29 21:48]: > > > > Isn't this the opposite end of the same problem for which Bernhard > > > > has been repeatedly trying to find a taker for his patch: > > > > > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kexec/1882 > > > > > > Yes. It's not the kobject patch at fault here, it's the use of kobjects > > > so early in the boot process. That needs to be fixed. > > It was a bit optimistic to stick an unconditional GFP_KERNEL allocation > into the previously-atomic kobject_init(). > > It's only 128 bytes, so why can't we fix both problems thusly? Fixes the bug for me (also true for previous patch from Bernhard). Thanks! -- 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/