Re: [RFC] -stable, how it's going to work.

From: Lee Revell
Date: Thu Mar 10 2005 - 13:41:50 EST

On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 09:31 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 12:27:23PM -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 08:43 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > That, and a zillion other specific wordings that people suggested fall
> > > under the:
> > > or some "oh, that's not good" issue
> > > rule.
> >
> > So just to be 100% clear, no sound with 2.6.N where the sound worked
> > with 2.6.N-1 absolutely does qualify. Right?
> Hm, do you think that is a "good" thing to have happen?...

OK, so it sounds like scheduling latency regressions also qualify. This
could make a system that worked on 2.6.N-1 unusable on 2.6.N, and the
fixes here (usually restoring a lockbreak) are almost always small and
obvious. And users do report this, usualy in the form of "JACK was
usable under foo kernel but I get xruns with the same config under bar


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at