On Fri, 2023-09-15 at 13:59 +0000, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: > > While the problem the patch tried to fix is real, it seems a lot less > problematic than the result of applying the patch. So from a release > perspective, I would keep the current code and possibly add it as a > known bug to the release notes. Then, after the release is out, start > the work of solving the fallout from applying the patch, with the > intention to have it solved for the first point release of Nanbield. > > While not ideal, it sounds a lot less stressful than applying the > patch at this stage.
My concern is the cache coherency issues this exposes. The 'easy' fix for release is explicit os.sync() calls in most command paths (everything except ping). I'm not sure I should really allow such a patch through review though as it would raise a lot of serious questions and the underlying issues need to be addressed. Cheers, Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#1762): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/1762 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/101375777/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
