linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Split up buffer handling from core code

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

Message-ID: <20110531182252.GA5256@somewhere.redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 31 May 2011 20:22:56 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Split up buffer handling from core code

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 07:55:04PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> And create the internal perf events header.
> 
> v2: Keep an internal inlined perf_output_copy()
> 
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
> ---

Are you guys fine with his patch?
If so, should I queue it myself and send a pull request?

I prefer to work step by step on this split, to avoid
too much review burden. And also a single detail
can require to rework the whole.
--
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/