In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, =?utf-8?B?SsO2cm4=?= Engel writes: > Maybe it is not obvious that I maintain this driver and would like to be > kept on Cc:. Will send a patch to fix that shortly.
I was looking in MAINTAINERS, and you weren't listed on the main MTD section as a maintainer. Perhaps an update? If you get a patch, I'd love to test it. > On Sun, 6 January 2008 02:17:32 -0500, Erez Zadok wrote: [...] > > In lieu of a better fix, is this patch acceptable? > > Not for me. I don't mind if you keep such a hack until a proper > solution if found in your private tree. But it is a horrible solution > to a problem introduced elsewhere. Yup, that's what I figured. I'll keep this ugly hack but I won't push it to my unionfs tree on kernel.org. > Ingo, Peter, does either of you actually care about this problem? In > the last round when I debugged this problem there was a notable lack of > reaction from either of you. The problem appears to be an interaction of two components--module loading and lockdep--that's perhaps why it wasn't given enough attention. I run a lot of regression tests w/ unionfs on top of many different file systems, and monitoring for all sorts of problems, including lockdep warnings. So it's frustrating that each time I get to test w/ jffs2, I get this lockdep warning, and lockdep shuts down until a reboot. That kills my automated testing and masks out possible other lockdep problems (that's why I wanted to at least have some workaround). Other lockdep problems I reported with other subsystems had been fixed within days; this one, unfortunately, has lingered for a while. So if a fix can be made in a reasonable time-frame, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks, Erez. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
