Re: 2.6.25-rc7-git5: Reported regressions from 2.6.24

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Monday, 31 of March 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 03:24:10PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> > Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 01:48:15PM -0400, Mark Lord wrote:
> >>> Rafael,
> >>>
> >>> Add this one to the list?
> >>
> >>
> >> That's not a regression from 2.6.24
> > ..
> >
> > 2.6.24 does not flood my syslog with those messages.
> > 2.6.25-rc* does.   Looks like a regression.
> >
> > The original bug was a hidden regression in 2.6.23,
> > which nobody bothered to identify until now.
> 
> Let's try to get this patch into Linus' tree without arguing 
> whether it might be called a post 2.6.24 regression or not.  ;)
> 
> > Just because some code "gets away with" a regression
> > for a kernel or two, doesn't mean that regression shouldn't be fixed.
> 
> No disagreement on this one.
> 
> We already have over 200 known (and many more once reported) regressions 
> in the kernel, and all of them should be fixed...

The patch have already been merged, BTW.

Thanks,
Rafael