On 2/25/19 11:00 AM, speck for Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:52:30AM -0500, speck for Jon Masters wrote: >> From: Jon Masters >> To: speck for Greg KH >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 31/43] MDSv6 > >> On 2/25/19 10:49 AM, speck for Greg KH wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 07:34:11AM -0800, speck for Andi Kleen wrote: >> >> >>>> However I will probably not be able to write a detailed >>>> description for each of the interrupt handlers changed because >>>> there are just too many. >>> >>> Then how do you expect each subsystem / driver author to know if this is >>> an acceptable change or not? How do you expect to educate driver >>> authors to have them determine if they need to do this on their new >>> drivers or not? Are you going to hand-audit each new driver that gets >>> added to the kernel for forever? >>> >>> Without this type of information, this seems like a futile exercise. >> >> Forgive me if I'm being too cautious here, but it seems to make most >> sense to have the basic MDS infrastructure in place at unembargo. Unless >> it's very clear how the auto stuff can be safe, and the audit >> comprehensive, I wonder if that shouldn't just be done after. > > I thought that was what Thomas's patchset provided and is what was > alluded to in patch 00/43 of this series. Indeed. I'm asking whether we're trying to figure out the "auto" stuff as well before unembargo or is the other discussion just for planning? Jon. -- Computer Architect | Sent with my Fedora powered laptop