On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Shaun Ruffell <sruff...@digium.com> wrote:
>
> I posted patches [1,2,3] that resolve the issue for me. Shaohui Xie
> also hit the issue and posted a slightly different patch [4]. The
> patches are currently waiting for Mauro, who I understand is
> catching up since returning from San Diego, to check them out.
>
> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134764595921752&w=2
> [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134764594721747&w=2
> [3] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134764597921761&w=2
> [4] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=134753579818528&w=2
That first patch needs a sign-off from you, since you are passing on
somebody elses patch.
Looking at that patch, the patch seems to be a memory leak (?) leaking
the "channels" allocation, along with fixing an odd and incorrect
kfree (and access) of mci->csrows[i]. If that is correct, please write
a proper changelog. The current changelog for that thing is totally
pointless, and doesn't actually explain what the patch *does*.
I'd also like some ack's from people, and I'd love to know which
commit introduced the problem(s). If this problem is new to 3.6, I
want to know what caused it, and if it is *not* new, then the thing
needs to be marked for stable. Please?
Finally, if I'm supposed to apply patches, I really *really* want to
see the patches sent to me explicitly, instead of having people post
pointers to them on the web. I don't apply random stuff on the web, I
want the "please take this patch" to be a case of people *explicitly*
sending it to me with the proper sign-offs in place etc.
IOW, the "hey, you should apply that random patch that wasn't even
sent to you" approach is not something I accept.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
