From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752570Ab1ISOna (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:43:30 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:51968 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751131Ab1ISOn3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Sep 2011 10:43:29 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:43:13 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: "Ramirez Luna, Omar" Cc: Rabin Vincent , lak , lk Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: BUG() dies silently Message-ID: <20110919144313.GU16381@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1301602523-9906-1-git-send-email-omar.ramirez@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 09:26:49AM -0500, Ramirez Luna, Omar wrote: > Hi > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 1:07 AM, Rabin Vincent wrote: > > If the "Use generic BUG() handler" patch is only scheduled for the next > > merge window and not for 3.1, can this patch be merged instead for 3.1 > > and -stable?  This problem is easily seen with GCC 4.6. > > I can send it for both and let the maintainers decide. > > Russell, do you give your ack? I think it's too large a change for -stable and 3.1 - let's get it into 3.2 first, and make sure no one sees any regressions there. Then we can think about submitting it to stable once its proven itself.