On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 02:27:24PM +0530, Poddar, Sourav wrote: > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Poddar, Sourav <sourav.poddar@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > > <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:44:59PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > >>> At least another person did post results: > >>> > >>> http://mid.gmane.org/20110117094602.GA2622@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> http://mid.gmane.org/20110117110308.GC2622@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> > >> Slightly different patch - there were three revisions. I can't attach > >> a tested-by given to a different patch to this one. > >> > >>> > That means omap2plus_defconfig .38 mainline kernels > >>> > (including -stable) will remain potentially dangerous when run on > >>> > SMP capable hardware. > >>> > >>> I must admit that this series looks a bit large for stable IMHO. I > >>> think that the fix for stable should limit itself only to prevent SMP > >>> from being selected if anything else than CPU_32v6K is selected. > >> > >> The first three are the bare minimum required for -stable. > >> > > > > Boot tested the 14 patch series with CONFIG_SWP_EMULATE enabled, on > the following boards : > > > 1. Omap2420 SDP > > 2. Omap2430 SDP > > 3. Omap3430 SDP > > 4. Omap4 Blaze > > Tested-by: Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar@xxxxxx> Thanks. It's also important to ascertain which filesystems were tested - could you let me know please? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
