From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755810Ab1I3Bzh (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:55:37 -0400 Received: from mx3-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.24]:34563 "EHLO mx3-phx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754674Ab1I3Bzg (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:55:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 21:53:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Doug Ledford To: Andrew Morton Cc: Greg KH , stable-review@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, Jiri Slaby , Manfred Spraul , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Subject: Re: [159/244] ipc/mqueue.c: fix mq_open() return value Message-ID: <2d56b06c-a778-4cb7-a952-a4384c8ce3cc@zmail05.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20110929164117.8ffc3878.akpm00@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.3.113.99] X-Mailer: Zimbra 7.1.2_GA_3268 (ZimbraWebClient - FF3.0 (Linux)/7.1.2_GA_3268) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ----- Original Message ----- > On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 19:31:41 -0400 (EDT) > > (Please hit occasionally?) It's this frikkin' Zimbra mail client. Something about it using text/flowed or something like that. Anyway, I'll manually line wrap. > This is all waaaaay too confusing. For starters, please never say > "the > patch" or "it" or "new patch". Patches have names - let's use them, > and greatly reduce the amount of head-spinning. (And I mean "names", > not git hashes, which can be different in different trees). > > There are no patches againt ipc/mqueue.c pending in any tree I can > see > apart from the 4+fix from yourself, which are in -mm and will be in > linux-next next time I send an update to Stephen: > > ipc-mqueue-cleanup-definition-names-and-locations.patch > ipc-mqueue-switch-back-to-using-non-max-values-on-create.patch > ipc-mqueue-enforce-hard-limits.patch > ipc-mqueue-update-maximums-for-the-mqueue-subsystem.patch > ipc-mqueue-update-maximums-for-the-mqueue-subsystem-checkpatch-fixes.patch > > Everything else is already in Linus's tree. > > I don't have a clue what's going on here. Let's start again. Your right. The patch I was referring to was the patch I NAKed, which is this patch: d40dcdb ipc/mqueue.c: fix mq_open() return value I didn't think it was in Linus' tree because of faulty memory. I remembered seeing ENOMEM as the return and not EMFILE when I wrote my patches. But, that makes sense given that I was originally staring at our internal 2.6.18 kernel tree as I wrote the code, and only later did I port it to Linus' tree. I spent a lot more time looking at our internal tree where the above patch doesn't exist. So, as I said, Greg I withdraw my NAK and we'll just fix it up in your stable tree after my patches have been reviewed/accepted in some version of Linus' tree. -- Doug Ledford GPG KeyID: CFBFF194 http://people.redhat.com/dledford