Hello sir,
> > I hope the patch will get merged soon.
>
> No need to "hope"; you could split up Matthew's patch yourself, and test and
> send the resulting patches. From the above thread, it looks like the
> networking
> developers want one patch to fix the improper use of GFP_ATOMIC (which is
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 10:43:31AM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 08:26:55PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:17:55AM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:08:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:47:2
On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 08:26:55PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:17:55AM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:08:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:47:24PM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> > > > idr_get_next() gives WARN_ON_ON
On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 12:17:55AM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:08:03PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2020 at 12:47:24PM +0530, Anmol Karn wrote:
> > > idr_get_next() gives WARN_ON_ONCE() when it gets (id > INT_MAX) true
> > > and this happens when syzbot
