[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1397079240.5261.27.camel@oc7886638347.ibm.com.usor.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2014 14:34:00 -0700
From: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Anton Arapov <aarapov@...hat.com>,
David Long <dave.long@...aro.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Lebon <jlebon@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] uprobes/x86: fix the reprel jmp/call
handling
On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 21:44 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 04/06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> >
> > OK. Please see the RFC changes. Obviously not for inclusion yet. And
> > totally untested, except I verified that the test-case from 4/6 works.
>
> Still not really tested, but seems to work.
>
> Please see v2. All changes are minor except the s/ENOSYS/-ENOSYS/ fix.
> Please see the intediff below. I also move "Introduce sizeof_long() ..."
> to the head of this series.
>
> Jim, I am still thinking how I can improve the commenents in 4/6 as you
> asked me, and I obviously need to write the changelogs and change "ttt"
> prefix.
>
> Will you agree with s/ttt/branch/ ?
Yes.
>
> Do you think the code is fine in v2 ?
Yes, except for certain comments wrt call emulation. See my reply about
patch #4 from a few minutes ago.
Once that's resolved, I consider all your patches so far
Reviewed-by: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>
and
Acked-by: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>
>
> Oleg.
...
Jim
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists