linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: minor PAT adaptations

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080612105740.GA20156@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:57:40 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
	Suresh B Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] x86: minor PAT adaptations


* Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com> wrote:

> > > patch 5 - slightly changing the code that is doing the intersection of
> > >           pat_type and mtrr_type to be more readable (from my point of view)
> > > 
> > > Patches are against x86/pat (as of version 
> > > v2.6.26-rc3-6-g46dd98a).
> > 
> > #5 makes sense too, but it didnt apply cleanly:
> 
> That's odd. I've double checked it by doing a fresh
> 
> $ git remote add tip git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git
> $ git remote update
> $ git checkout tip/x86/pat
> 
> and applying patches 1-5 in sequence without problems.
> (Patches were taken from emails that arrived via my linux-kernel
> subscription.) Probably your tip/x86/pat is not at
> v2.6.26-rc3-6-g46dd98a?

it was there - but some other commit from upstream interfered.

> When trying to apply the patches to tip/master I get rejects for 
> patches 3 and 5.
> 
> Hence I think creating my patches against a feature branch was not a 
> good idea.

it was a good idea - as that the final destination where the PAT patches 
end up.

current tip/x86/pat head is:

 tip/x86/pat 499f8f8: x86: rename pat_wc_enabled to pat_enabled

> >  1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- rejects in file arch/x86/mm/pat.c
> > 
> > (it didnt apply neither against tip/x86/pat or tip/master, nor against 
> > linus/master. I guess it's some mixup somewhere.)
> 
> Ok, it's commit 282c454cd3a7041f59a37112bb2f82263bc38f6c which was not 
> contained in the tip/x86/pat branch. This means I have to adapt patch 
> 5.

indeed. I cherry-picked this commit meanwhile into x86/pat.

> Finally a dumb question. What patches do you prefer? Patches against 
> feature branches (say tip/x86/foo), against tip/master or against 
> tip/auto-latest as described in your tip.git-Readme?

either is fine - but if you make specific topic updates it's best to do 
them against the topic branch and we'll integrate them all together. If 
in doubt, using tip/master doesnt hurt.

usually i do this: i update x86/pat, then i switch to 'master' and check 
whether it all merges cleanly via 'git-merge x86/pat'.

when you switch to a topic branch, you might also want to update to the 
latest linus tree via 'git-merge linus/master', to pick up all other 
fixes as well. The topic branches always merge cleanly to linus-latest. 
(we automate that - the x86/pat topic branch is not stale as its -rc3 
base would suggest, there simply was no need to merge it to Linus-latest 
up to now)

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/