Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 05:00:20PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> So this one isn't technically needed. It turns out the memory stomp can't >> actually happen, because while the code is ugly and wrong, the hlist_del_init >> will actually fix things up almost by accident. Although it might even have >> been on purpose by Al originally. >> >> So I'm not sure it needs back porting. It's *probably* a good idea, but the bug >> wasn't as bad as originally thought. >> >> Al added to cc just to keep him in the loop. It might be worth back porting >> just to keep stable similar to head wrt this very confusing code. Al, comments? > > I think it's probably worth keeping in sync just to keep the confusion > to a minimum, unless Al objects. I have one more round of patches that are candidates for backporting that I was working on when I found this weirdness that sits on top of this patch and changes the same lines of code. I am hoping to get them to Linus before too much longer but reviewing and testing patches takes time so we will see. Eric -- 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