From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23513C433F5 for ; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 19:43:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1353266AbiBCTnV (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2022 14:43:21 -0500 Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de ([195.135.220.29]:36426 "EHLO smtp-out2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231996AbiBCTnU (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Feb 2022 14:43:20 -0500 Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3FE91F399; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 19:43:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1643917399; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=djYBuNzUo5jlyYldd5YsGcxLff7fJbIGicD7buvtm2k=; b=NwM5TkfR1zyi/rgDW50fbTo0gTVrSMXizrc1Hdhka9rZBFsRiu1IrRdxGRLSj4edOVDiaC U4627lPy3D9aD6lTwPLKBYSjy1mDOQt7w/g2IzW7Mdz/Vz6arGUir9qfXv7vfY8ZS9SBZS EAC6fEiLmRag8QFr2rnW3PubGKi1LkY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1643917399; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=djYBuNzUo5jlyYldd5YsGcxLff7fJbIGicD7buvtm2k=; b=QGceBBfehFjsqNEjwXcVC31z3bq7/nzYuwVBDa0BISCQVByB2w4M478kVcehlHYQosR5FL QEnUNk5Norx3y0Cw== Received: from kunlun.suse.cz (unknown [10.100.128.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A061FA3B81; Thu, 3 Feb 2022 19:43:18 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 20:43:17 +0100 From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Such=E1nek?= To: Luis Chamberlain Cc: Aaron Tomlin , Christophe Leroy , cl@linux.com, pmladek@suse.com, mbenes@suse.cz, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jeyu@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, atomlin@atomlin.com, ghalat@redhat.com, allen.lkml@gmail.com, void@manifault.com, joe@perches.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/13] module: core code clean up Message-ID: <20220203194317.GC3113@kunlun.suse.cz> References: <20220130213214.1042497-1-atomlin@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: Hello, On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 04:20:41PM -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 09:32:01PM +0000, Aaron Tomlin wrote: > > Hi Luis, > > > > As per your suggestion [1], this is an attempt to refactor and split > > optional code out of core module support code into separate components. > > This version is based on branch mcgrof/modules-next since a97ac8cb24a3/or > > modules-5.17-rc1. Please let me know your thoughts. > > > > Changes since v1 [2]: > > Thanks for all this work Aaron! Can you drop the RFC prefix, > rebase onto linus' latest tree (as he already merged my > modules-next, so his tree is more up to date), and submit again? > > I'll then apply this to my modules-next, and then ask Christophe to > rebase on top of that. > > Michal, you'd be up next if you want to go through modules-next. Sounds like a good idea. When rebasing on top of 5.17-rc1 the only conflict was on the module code. Thanks Michal