On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 16:51 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sun, 2011-05-01 at 12:33 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-04-30 at 17:34 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > Ian, should we apply the backport from > > > 64141da587241301ce8638cc945f8b67853156ec to squeeze for bug #613634 et > > > al? > > > > It's already in SVN for 2.6.32-34, seems to be in the changelog twice > > even, once closing #614400 and then again closing #613634, which are > > merged. > > Oh right, it's applied to the xen-featureset kernels. So it is, I'd forgotten that. > But isn't it also > applicable to non-xen-featureset kernels which can run in domU? Yes. I initially confused it with the vmalloc_sync_all fixes which really only impact domains running backend drivers (since that's the only real user of that code path). The vunmap thing is indeed more generically useful to fix so I think it should go into the generic flavours too. Want me to take a look at that? Ian. -- Ian Campbell I am currently transitioning to a new OpenPGP key, please see: http://www.hellion.org.uk/key-transition-2011-04-27-2F6BCD59-to-79074FA8.txt That must be wonderful: I don't understand it at all. -- Moliere
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part