From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752999AbbBWQHM (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2015 11:07:12 -0500 Received: from mail-lb0-f173.google.com ([209.85.217.173]:41089 "EHLO mail-lb0-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752152AbbBWQHK (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2015 11:07:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <54EB39CF.8050908@redhat.com> References: <1421272101-16847-1-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <1421272101-16847-3-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <54EB39CF.8050908@redhat.com> From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 08:06:46 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] x86: mass removal of ARGOFFSET To: Denys Vlasenko Cc: Linus Torvalds , Oleg Nesterov , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Frederic Weisbecker , X86 ML , Alexei Starovoitov , Will Drewry , Kees Cook , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On 02/21/2015 01:31 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote: >>> ARGOFFSET is zero now, removing it changes no code. >>> A few macros lost "offset" parameter, since it is always zero now too. >> >> Can you rebase this? It doesn't apply because sysret_check is gone, >> but, even if I remove the offending hunk, it's still missing things. > > Sure thing. > > I must be on a wrong branch? I'm on "x86/entry", and patch does apply > to the current tip of that branch: > > $ git am 0001-x86-mass-removal-of-ARGOFFSET.patch > Applying: x86: mass removal of ARGOFFSET > $ git branch -a > master > * x86/entry > x86/entry-devel > remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master > remotes/origin/auditsc-lite > remotes/origin/checkpatch > > Should I base patches on x86/entry-devel ? No, "entry" is correct. entry-devel doesn't exist any more. Had you done 'git remote update'? In any case, your rebased version is fine. --Andy