Return-path: Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.24]:44398 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752051AbZKCPyj convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:54:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1257262588.3420.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20091103053156.GA3212@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20091102.224957.32364226.davem@davemloft.net> <20091103065238.GE3212@core.coreip.homeip.net> <1257232587.3420.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1257262588.3420.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 16:54:43 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Please consider reverting 7d930bc33653d5592dc386a76a38f39c2e962344 From: Zdenek Kabelac To: Marcel Holtmann Cc: Linus Torvalds , Dmitry Torokhov , David Miller , johannes@sipsolutions.net, linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: 2009/11/3 Marcel Holtmann : > Hi Linus, > >> > and can we please stop jumping the gun here and going past the subsystem >> > maintainers. I think this happens a little bit too much lately. >> >> NO! >> >> Quite frankly, I'm very unhappy indeed with the maintainers when it comes >> to this bug: >> >> ?- it was introduced after -rc5 >> >> ?- it's been bisected by multiple people >> >> ?- I've seen one of the encounters with a person who bisected it, and the >> ? ?author of the buggy commit just wanted "more information" after having >> ? ?been told that small commit causes lockups. >> >> In other words - the LAST thing we should do is to pat the subsystem >> maintainers on the back and say "good job". >> >> The fact is, when somebody reports a major bug that is fixed by a revert, >> then I shoudl probably revert _more_ eagerly rather than less! >> >> And subsystem maintainers should jump on it, not wait several days. > > no questions that it needs fixed, I agree with you. However just blindly > reverting something, because it fixes it for one or two people, might > have side effects that causes more problems than the revert would > actually fix. In this case, let at least give John or Johannes a chance > to comment on it. > > I do love the fact that it gets bisected down to one particular commit. > That is great and thanks to the people who did that, but let the > subsystem maintainers know and then have them either provide a fix or > revert it by them. Sometimes it might take more than one day. And lets > be honest here, Johannes is one of the most responsive persons when it > comes to wireless bugs. > > Regards Well for me the issue has been fixed by http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/30/68 But it was not easy to decrypt bug after resume in my case.... However doing commit of memcpy where the src could be NULL in -rc5 looks really suspicious. Regards Zdenek