1. 26 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  2. 21 7月, 2010 2 次提交
  3. 20 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  4. 19 7月, 2010 3 次提交
    • S
      [S390] cio: fix potential overflow in chpid descriptor · 878c4956
      Sebastian Ott 提交于
      The length filed in the chsc response block (if valid)
      has a value of n*(sizeof(chp_desc))+8 (for the response
      block header). When we memcopied from the response block
      to the actual descriptor we copied 8 bytes too much.
      The bug was not revealed since the descriptor is embedded
      in struct channel_path.
      Since we only write one descriptor at a time ignore the
      length value and use sizeof(*desc).
      Signed-off-by: NSebastian Ott <sebott@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMartin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      878c4956
    • S
      [S390] add missing device put · 0abccf77
      Stefan Haberland 提交于
      The dasd_alias_show function does not return a device reference
      in case the device is an alias.
      Signed-off-by: NStefan Haberland <stefan.haberland@de.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NMartin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      0abccf77
    • L
      drm/i915: add 'reclaimable' to i915 self-reclaimable page allocations · cd9f040d
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      The hibernate issues that got fixed in commit 985b823b ("drm/i915:
      fix hibernation since i915 self-reclaim fixes") turn out to have been
      incomplete.  Vefa Bicakci tested lots of hibernate cycles, and without
      the __GFP_RECLAIMABLE flag the system eventually fails to resume.
      
      With the flag added, Vefa can apparently hibernate forever (or until he
      gets bored running his automated scripts, whichever comes first).
      
      The reclaimable flag was there originally, and was one of the flags that
      were dropped (unintentionally) by commit 4bdadb97 ("drm/i915:
      Selectively enable self-reclaim") that introduced all these problems,
      but I didn't want to just blindly add back all the flags in commit
      985b823b, and it looked like __GFP_RECLAIM wasn't necessary.  It
      clearly was.
      
      I still suspect that there is some subtle reason we're missing that
      causes the problems, but __GFP_RECLAIMABLE is certainly not wrong to use
      in this context, and is what the code historically used.  And we have no
      idea what the causes the corruption without it.
      Reported-and-tested-by: NM. Vefa Bicakci <bicave@superonline.com>
      Cc: Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
      Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
      Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
      Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>
      Cc: stable@kernel.org
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      cd9f040d
  5. 17 7月, 2010 1 次提交
    • B
      PCI: fall back to original BIOS BAR addresses · 58c84eda
      Bjorn Helgaas 提交于
      If we fail to assign resources to a PCI BAR, this patch makes us try the
      original address from BIOS rather than leaving it disabled.
      
      Linux tries to make sure all PCI device BARs are inside the upstream
      PCI host bridge or P2P bridge apertures, reassigning BARs if necessary.
      Windows does similar reassignment.
      
      Before this patch, if we could not move a BAR into an aperture, we left
      the resource unassigned, i.e., at address zero.  Windows leaves such BARs
      at the original BIOS addresses, and this patch makes Linux do the same.
      
      This is a bit ugly because we disable the resource long before we try to
      reassign it, so we have to keep track of the BIOS BAR address somewhere.
      For lack of a better place, I put it in the struct pci_dev.
      
      I think it would be cleaner to attempt the assignment immediately when the
      claim fails, so we could easily remember the original address.  But we
      currently claim motherboard resources in the middle, after attempting to
      claim PCI resources and before assigning new PCI resources, and changing
      that is a fairly big job.
      
      Addresses https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16263Reported-by: NAndrew <nitr0@seti.kr.ua>
      Tested-by: NAndrew <nitr0@seti.kr.ua>
      Signed-off-by: NBjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
      Signed-off-by: NJesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
      58c84eda
  6. 16 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  7. 15 7月, 2010 1 次提交
  8. 12 7月, 2010 5 次提交
  9. 10 7月, 2010 2 次提交
  10. 09 7月, 2010 14 次提交
  11. 08 7月, 2010 6 次提交
  12. 07 7月, 2010 3 次提交