On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:27:41 +0200 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday 30 July 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 09:06:50 +0200 Bernhard Walle <bwalle@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > * Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> [2008-07-29 21:48]: > > > > > Isn't this the opposite end of the same problem for which Bernhard > > > > > has been repeatedly trying to find a taker for his patch: > > > > > > > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.kexec/1882 > > > > > > > > Yes. It's not the kobject patch at fault here, it's the use of kobjects > > > > so early in the boot process. That needs to be fixed. > > > > It was a bit optimistic to stick an unconditional GFP_KERNEL allocation > > into the previously-atomic kobject_init(). > > > > It's only 128 bytes, so why can't we fix both problems thusly? > > Fixes the bug for me (also true for previous patch from Bernhard). > Cool. The offending patch has just got itself turfed from linux-next so my fix now has nothing to fix. We'll see what happens! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
