linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 08/32] Define CONFIG_INTEL

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1607132303580.4083@nanos>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:09:31 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
	David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
	"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
	Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Prakhya, Sai Praneeth" <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 08/32] Define CONFIG_INTEL_RDT

On Wed, 13 Jul 2016, Yu, Fenghua wrote:
> Here is why this patch behaves like this:
> 
> This patch and actually first 12 patches are directly from last year's
> cgroup base CAT patch series. The last year's patch series had gone 16
> versions already. Because the first 12 patches have been reviewed many
> times, we keep them untouched (except removing cgroup code in patch 8 and
> some unused cdp code in patch 11) and release other patches on top of the
> first 12 patches.

Which is not making the review any simpler. In order to understand the
modifications I have to go back and page in the original stuff from last year
once again. So I have to read the original patch first to understand the
modifications and then get the overall picture of the new stuff. Please fold
stuff back to the proper places so I can start reviewing this thing under the
new design idea instead of twisting my brain around two designs.
 
> I fully agree this patch should be split if we want to have a good overall
> patch series.

Good.

Thanks,

	tglx