From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
kvmarm <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/18] arm64: kernel: Convert to modern annotations for assembly functions
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:22:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200228152219.GA4956@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200228133718.GB4019108@arrakis.emea.arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 912 bytes --]
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:37:18PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:41:21PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > This hunk is going to conflict badly with the EFI tree. I will
> > incorporate this change for v5.7, so could you please just drop it
> > from this patch?
Will do for any reposts.
> I wonder whether it would be easier to merge all these patches at
> 5.7-rc1, once most of the major changes went in.
Only thing I can think that doing that might cause issue with is if
people are doing work that's not likely to make it in this cycle then
it'd be some extra rebasing or carrying of out of tree patches they'd
need to do (plus obviously this series might pick up new conflicts
itself). It's not a completely automated process unfortunately,
especially with trying to fix up some of the problems with the existing
annotations changing the output. But yeah, we could do that.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
kvmarm <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/18] arm64: kernel: Convert to modern annotations for assembly functions
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:22:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200228152219.GA4956@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200228133718.GB4019108@arrakis.emea.arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 912 bytes --]
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:37:18PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:41:21PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > This hunk is going to conflict badly with the EFI tree. I will
> > incorporate this change for v5.7, so could you please just drop it
> > from this patch?
Will do for any reposts.
> I wonder whether it would be easier to merge all these patches at
> 5.7-rc1, once most of the major changes went in.
Only thing I can think that doing that might cause issue with is if
people are doing work that's not likely to make it in this cycle then
it'd be some extra rebasing or carrying of out of tree patches they'd
need to do (plus obviously this series might pick up new conflicts
itself). It's not a completely automated process unfortunately,
especially with trying to fix up some of the problems with the existing
annotations changing the output. But yeah, we could do that.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 151 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
kvmarm <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
"open list:HARDWARE RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR CORE"
<linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/18] arm64: kernel: Convert to modern annotations for assembly functions
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 15:22:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200228152219.GA4956@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200228133718.GB4019108@arrakis.emea.arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 912 bytes --]
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:37:18PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 01:41:21PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > This hunk is going to conflict badly with the EFI tree. I will
> > incorporate this change for v5.7, so could you please just drop it
> > from this patch?
Will do for any reposts.
> I wonder whether it would be easier to merge all these patches at
> 5.7-rc1, once most of the major changes went in.
Only thing I can think that doing that might cause issue with is if
people are doing work that's not likely to make it in this cycle then
it'd be some extra rebasing or carrying of out of tree patches they'd
need to do (plus obviously this series might pick up new conflicts
itself). It's not a completely automated process unfortunately,
especially with trying to fix up some of the problems with the existing
annotations changing the output. But yeah, we could do that.
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-28 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-18 19:58 [PATCH 00/18] arm64: Modernize assembly annotations Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 01/18] arm64: crypto: Modernize some extra " Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 02/18] arm64: crypto: Modernize names for AES function macros Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 03/18] arm64: entry: Annotate vector table and handlers as code Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 04/18] arm64: entry: Annotate ret_from_fork " Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 05/18] arm64: entry: Additional annotation conversions for entry.S Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 06/18] arm64: entry-ftrace.S: Convert to modern annotations for assembly functions Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 07/18] arm64: ftrace: Correct annotation of ftrace_caller assembly Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 08/18] arm64: ftrace: Modernise annotation of return_to_handler Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 09/18] arm64: head.S: Convert to modern annotations for assembly functions Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 10/18] arm64: head: Annotate stext and preserve_boot_args as code Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 11/18] arm64: kernel: Convert to modern annotations for assembly data Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 12/18] arm64: kernel: Convert to modern annotations for assembly functions Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-28 12:41 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-02-28 12:41 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-02-28 12:41 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2020-02-28 13:37 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-02-28 13:37 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-02-28 13:37 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-02-28 15:22 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2020-02-28 15:22 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-28 15:22 ` Mark Brown
2020-03-09 17:52 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-03-09 17:52 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-03-09 17:52 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-03-09 17:55 ` Mark Brown
2020-03-09 17:55 ` Mark Brown
2020-03-09 17:55 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 13/18] arm64: kvm: Annotate assembly using modern annoations Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-28 17:35 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 17:35 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-28 17:35 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 14/18] arm64: kvm: Modernize annotation for __bp_harden_hyp_vecs Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 15/18] arm64: kvm: Modernize __smccc_workaround_1_smc_start annotations Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 16/18] arm64: sdei: Annotate SDEI entry points using new style annotations Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 17/18] arm64: vdso: Convert to modern assembler annotations Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` [PATCH 18/18] arm64: vdso32: " Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
2020-02-18 19:58 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200228152219.GA4956@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.