On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 11:53:47AM +0900, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:02:27AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
On 05/23/2015 04:16 PM, Larry Finger wrote:
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to
calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 11:02:27AM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
On 05/23/2015 04:16 PM, Larry Finger wrote:
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such warnings are fixed by calling
del_timer() instead.
On 05/26/2015 12:30 AM, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:07:59PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:32 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 09:55:08PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:16 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon,
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 09:35:55AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
Also, the outreachy patch process would overwhelm everyone else on the
list, it's really high volume during the application phase, I'd prefer
it to stick with the mentors that wish to help out with the process. If
you and/or Dan, or
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:06:17AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
If you're collecting them, I suggest you stick them in
a separate branch, post them to your driverdev list and
cc the appropriate maintainers, wait a week, then apply
them to your main branch.
That would work. A massive thread is
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 10:06:17AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 09:35 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:48:59AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
The main point is that patches shouldn't be applied without
being submitted to a more widely read list.
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:07:59PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:32 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 09:55:08PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:16 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:37:28AM -0700, Joe
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 07:14 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:07:59PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
As far as I understand, the Eudyptula Challenge list has
internal mechanisms to nominally review patches before some
patch is submitted to lkml.
No it does not.
That's not
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:48:59AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 07:14 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:07:59PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
As far as I understand, the Eudyptula Challenge list has
internal mechanisms to nominally review patches before some
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:14:01AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
I take the blame for any problems with Outreachy patches. Given the
huge volume of them, one bug out of 900 isn't that bad of a percentage.
We don't get many bugs through outreachy, but this isn't the first one.
For example, in March and
On 05/26/2015 10:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:14:01AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
I take the blame for any problems with Outreachy patches. Given the
huge volume of them, one bug out of 900 isn't that bad of a percentage.
We don't get many bugs through outreachy, but this
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 09:35 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 07:48:59AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
The main point is that patches shouldn't be applied without
being submitted to a more widely read list.
I take the blame for any problems with Outreachy patches.
Are
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:40PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
On 05/24/2015 02:03 PM, Haggai Eran wrote:
On 24 May 2015 at 00:16, Larry Finger larry.fin...@lwfinger.net wrote:
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode.
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 03:07:08PM +0530, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
I am sorry for those patches. It was me who introduced those bugs. Yes, it
was sent during Outreachy process. But it was my mistake as a newbie. May
be I should have taken care of interrupt mode thing.
I would like to fix it
On 05/23/2015 04:16 PM, Larry Finger wrote:
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such warnings are fixed by calling
del_timer() instead.
Signed-off-by: Larry Finger larry.fin...@lwfinger.net
Cc: Stable
On 05/25/2015 04:37 AM, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
On 25 May 2015 14:49, Dan Carpenter dan.carpen...@oracle.com
mailto:dan.carpen...@oracle.com wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 07:11:40PM -0500, Larry Finger wrote:
On 05/24/2015 02:03 PM, Haggai Eran wrote:
On 24 May 2015 at 00:16, Larry
On 05/24/2015 11:42 PM, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
I haven't been using kernel v4.1 so I haven't seen this warning, but looking
at the code it seems to originate from the two recent patches to remove
_cancel_timer and _cancel_timer_ex. I see that there's another patch in lkml [1]
that changes
On Mon, 2015-05-25 at 12:17 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
These are special intern patches that
dont' go through the normal review process. The intern process is over
this year. The lack of normal review introduced a number of bugs this
year. I always complain to Greg about it and he says
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:16 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:37:28AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
It'd be better if the approved patches from the intern list
(no idea what that is) were sent to lkml/devel@driverdev lists
for review before actually being applied.
Its
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:07:59PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:32 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 09:55:08PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:16 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:37:28AM -0700, Joe
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:37:28AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
It'd be better if the approved patches from the intern list
(no idea what that is) were sent to lkml/devel@driverdev lists
for review before actually being applied.
Its the outreachy program. And
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 09:55:08PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:16 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:37:28AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
It'd be better if the approved patches from the intern list
(no idea what that is) were sent to
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:32 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 09:55:08PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 10:16 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 10:37:28AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
It'd be better if the approved patches from the
On 24 May 2015 at 00:16, Larry Finger larry.fin...@lwfinger.net wrote:
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such warnings are fixed by calling
del_timer() instead.
Signed-off-by: Larry Finger
On 05/24/2015 02:03 PM, Haggai Eran wrote:
On 24 May 2015 at 00:16, Larry Finger larry.fin...@lwfinger.net wrote:
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such warnings are fixed by calling
del_timer() instead.
I haven't been using kernel v4.1 so I haven't seen this warning, but looking
at the code it seems to originate from the two recent patches to remove
_cancel_timer and _cancel_timer_ex. I see that there's another patch in lkml
[1]
that changes del_timer_sync back to del_timer in more places.
The driver is reporting a warning at kernel/time/timer.c:1096 due to calling
del_timer_sync() while in interrupt mode. Such warnings are fixed by calling
del_timer() instead.
Signed-off-by: Larry Finger larry.fin...@lwfinger.net
Cc: Stable sta...@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Haggi Eran
27 matches
Mail list logo
