On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 03:47:59PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 03:41:11PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 01:35:54PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > > > The patch below does not apply to the 3.10-stable tree.
> > > > If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
> > > > tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
> > > > id to <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> > > >
> > >
> > > In my check, this patch is cleanly applied on top of 3.10.45 + commit
> > > 74614de17db6 ("mm/memory-failure.c: don't let collect_procs() skip
> > > over processes for MF_ACTION_REQUIRED").
> > > There might have been a conflict with other patches newly backported
> > > to stable. Could you show me how you failed to apply?
> >
> > Ah, I must have tried to apply this one before 74614de17db6, it now
> > works in 3.10-stable, thanks.
>
> Hm, the patch breaks the build with the following error:
>
> mm/memory-failure.c: In function ‘find_early_kill_thread’:
> mm/memory-failure.c:397:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘for_each_thread’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
> for_each_thread(tsk, t)
> ^
> mm/memory-failure.c:398:3: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘if’
> if ((t->flags & PF_MCE_PROCESS) && (t->flags & PF_MCE_EARLY))
> ^
>
> which is why I think I didn't apply it before. We don't have
> for_each_thread() in 3.10, and backporting it is non-trivial. Is this
> worth it for 3.10?
OK, this is not a trivial backporting, and the fix is not for a critical bug,
so I'm OK to drop from 3.10 and 3.4.
Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html