Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f52.google.com ([209.85.210.52]:52132 "EHLO mail-pz0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933302Ab2DLBNS (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:13:18 -0400 Received: by dake40 with SMTP id e40so1888811dak.11 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:13:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 18:13:13 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Felipe Contreras Cc: Sergio Correia , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-wireless Mailing List , Sujith Manoharan , "ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" , "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [ 00/78] 3.3.2-stable review Message-ID: <20120412011313.GA23764@kroah.com> (sfid-20120412_031322_242902_D4E27004) References: <20120411231102.GA6404@kroah.com> <20120412002927.GA23167@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 04:03:59AM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 3:29 AM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 07:59:14PM -0400, Sergio Correia wrote: > >> Hello Greg, > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 7:11 PM, Greg KH wrote: > >> > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 3.3.2 release. > >> > There are 78 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response > >> > to this one. ?If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please > >> > let me know. > >> > > >> > Responses should be made by Fri Apr 13 23:10:16 UTC 2012. > >> > Anything received after that time might be too late. > >> > > >> > >> is there any chance for this one to be included in this review cycle? > >> > >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-wireless/msg87999.html > > I was going to ask for exactly the same thing. My system is completely > unusable without this patch; not only does the network doesn't work, > but quite often the kernel is stuck consuming 100% of the CPU. > > > Have you read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt? ?Based on that, I > > don't think it can, yet, right? > > Why not? This patch makes the code go back to a previous state, it is > obviously more stable than the current state, and the code already > exists in Linus's tree (in previous releases). It does? What is the git commit id of the patch? Based in the email above, I assumed it had not made it to Linus's tree already. > But hey, I guess it's OK that 3.3.x is stuck in and endless loop right > after booting, because rules are more important than fixing obvious > breakage. What rule did you think I was saying this was not acceptable for? greg k-h