[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#607416: Bug #607416: Device table incorrect for drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd.c: 3880/3390 should be 3880/3380



On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 11:05:37 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> 
> You know stable@kernel.org?  Use it.

Yes, I contacted stable@kernel.org regarding bug number 550898.  But
this situation is a little bit different.  With 550898, IBM wrote
a single git commit to fix a single bug.  Asking for that commit to
be back-ported was a routine matter.  But for bug number 607416 it appears
that they didn't do it that way.  Thanks to the information provided by
Jonathan Nieder, I was able to find the commit for this bug.  It is
listed below:

-----

   commit f85cca6b25971a09efbe4c6a3ae405d40c8f86da
   Merge: 6f576d5 dd30ac3
   Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
   Date:   Mon Feb 21 14:55:49 2011 -0800

       Merge branch 'for-linus' of git://git390.marist.edu/pub/scm/linux-2.6

       * 'for-linus' of git://git390.marist.edu/pub/scm/linux-2.6:
         [S390] net: provide architecture specific NET_SKB_PAD
         [S390] atomic: use inline asm
         [S390] correct ipl parameter block safe guard
         [S390] atomic: use ACCESS_ONCE() for atomic_read()
         [S390] dasd: correct device table

-----

As far as I can tell, only the last line is applicable to this bug.

         [S390] dasd: correct device table

In other words, instead of producing a single fix for a single bug,
they threw the fix in with several other miscellaneous fixes and enhancements.
I wish IBM hadn't done it that way, but they did.  Therefore, I am unsure
as to how to proceed.  Do I ask stable@kernel.org to port the whole commit?
(It may have dependencies on previous commits and get complicated rather
quickly.)  Or do I ask them to cherry pick that one-line change in
drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd.c?  I could use some advice here.

-- 
  .''`.     Stephen Powell    
 : :'  :
 `. `'`
   `-



Reply to: