Bug 100435

Summary:	differing patch in kernel srpm for RH 7 and RH 9
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Simon Matter <simon.matter>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Arjan van de Ven <arjanv>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Brian Brock <bbrock>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	9	CC:	riel
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2003-07-22 15:39:15 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Simon Matter 2003-07-22 12:46:20 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030516
Mozilla Firebird/0.6

Description of problem:
Recent source rpms of RedHat errata kernel have always looked the same for RH 7
and 9 with only one differente in the .spec file. Now, the 2.4.20-19.x package
contains a different patch in the source rpm.

While building updated XFS enabled RPMs of the 2.4.20-19.x kernel rpms, I diffed
both source rpms kernel-2.4.20-19.7.src.rpm and kernel-2.4.20-19.9.src.rpm and
it looked like this:

[simix@sup simix]$ diff -r kernel-2.4.20-19.7.src kernel-2.4.20-19.9.src
diff -r kernel-2.4.20-19.7.src/kernel-2.4.spec
kernel-2.4.20-19.9.src/kernel-2.4.spec
24c24
< %define release 19.7
---
> %define release 19.9
34,35c34,35
< #define nptlarchs %{all_x86}
< %define nptlarchs noarch
---
> %define nptlarchs %{all_x86}
> #define nptlarchs noarch
diff -r kernel-2.4.20-19.7.src/linux-2.4.20-rmap-updates.patch
kernel-2.4.20-19.9.src/linux-2.4.20-rmap-updates.patch
403c403
< +     ret += try_to_reclaim_buffers(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);
---
> +     try_to_reclaim_buffers(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);


I'm afraid kernel-2.4.20-19.9.src/linux-2.4.20-rmap-updates.patch has a wrong
line 403.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
kernel-2.4.20-19.9

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. See Description
2.
3.
    

Actual Results:  See Description

Expected Results:  See Description

Additional info:

See Description

Comment 1 Rik van Riel 2003-07-22 14:14:19 UTC

the rmap patch should indeed be the same in 7 and 9

however, since the rmap patch depends on some nptl patches I don't think it is
actually applied for the RHL7 errata kernel ...

Comment 2 Simon Matter 2003-07-22 15:28:02 UTC

To mee it looks like the wrong patch, the one from 9, was then applied to the 9
kernel. This is from the patch applied with the 9 kernel, which looks wrong to me:

@@ -850,6 +875,7 @@ static int do_try_to_free_pages(unsigned
        ret += rebalance_inactive(gfp_mask, 100);
        ret += shrink_dcache_memory(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);
        ret += shrink_icache_memory(1, gfp_mask);
+       try_to_reclaim_buffers(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);
        // ret += shrink_other_caches( DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);
 #ifdef CONFIG_QUOTA
        ret += shrink_dqcache_memory(DEF_PRIORITY, gfp_mask);

Comment 3 Arjan van de Ven 2003-07-22 15:39:15 UTC

the rhl9 code is correct. this is not a problem because the patch is only
applied for RHL9 anyway.