Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Anyway, SOB flaming aside, i think there's now consensus that we
don't want to disable lockdep for TAINT_OOT modules.
Mind (re-)sending a delta patch against tip:master that excludes
that taint flag in addition to the already excluded
TAINT_FIRMWARE case? That should close this rather verbose
chapter of taint flag handling changes for good ;-)
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
- References:
- [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
- From: tip-bot for Ben Hutchings
- Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
- Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
- Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
- Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
- Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
- Re: [tip:core/locking] lockdep, rtmutex, bug: Show taint flags on error
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Stable Commits]
[Linux Stable Kernel]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Linux Video &Media]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]