On 10/19/2016 02:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 10/19/2016 02:29 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> On 10/19/2016 01:07 PM, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>>> Anyways, we seem good to go with the patch.
>>
>> Ok, committed. Thanks for the analysis!
>
> Oh, forgot that this needs to be backported, of course. Will do that
> shortly...
Done.
This didn't include anything to cope with an already-corrupt FSM, BTW.
Do we still want to try something for that? I think it's good enough if
we prevent the FSM corruption from happening, but not sure what the
consensus on that might be..
- Heikki
