On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 03:39:53PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 14:57:09 -0800 > Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 03:05:48PM -0800, [email protected] wrote: > > > From: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]> > > > Subject: lib: atomic64: initialize locks statically to fix early users > > > > > > The atomic64 library uses a handful of static spin locks to implement > > > atomic 64-bit operations on architectures without support for atomic > > > 64-bit instructions. Unfortunately, the spinlocks are initialized in a > > > pure initcall and that is too late for the vfs namespace code which wants > > > to use atomic64 operations before the initcall is run (introduced by > > > 8823c07 "vfs: Add setns support for the mount namespace"). > > > > > > > ... > > > > As the issue this patch fixes didn't show up until 3.8-rc1, why is this > > patch needed in any stable kernel tree? > > I figured that the bug could bite us from other callsites: anything > which uses an atomic64 sufficiently early in boot. On obscure > architectures...
Ok, fair enough, thanks, now queued up. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
