linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/4]: perf/core: complete replace of lists by rb trees for pinned and flexible groups at perf_event

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]

Date:   Wed, 19 Jul 2017 08:48:39 +0300
From:   Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
        Dmitri Prokhorov <Dmitry.Prohorov@...el.com>,
        Valery Cherepennikov <valery.cherepennikov@...el.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4]: perf/core: complete replace of lists by rb trees for pinned and flexible groups at perf_event_context

Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com> writes:

> On 18.07.2017 19:55, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
>> Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com> writes:
>> 
>>> I see. Do you personally have some more issues that needs to be addressed?
>>> My intention is that this patch v5 4/4 addresses all your comments raised in 
>>> the previous reviews.
>> 
>> I don't know yet, I haven't started on the actual content of the
>> patchset, it being hard to read. I'm going to wait for more readable
>> versions to look at the actual code.
>
> Is the whole final change attached to this patch v5 4/4 sufficient for you to proceed?

No. As I've said yesterday here [1] and here [2], patches have to make
sense on their own. I'm sure 'submitting-patches' also has something to
that effect.

> If not - please suggest the form which is more convenient for you.

I've also answered this already in [3]:

> Well, normally you'd be sending new versions of your patchset until the
> maintainers are happy with it, at which point they'd pick it up. New
> versions would address the issues pointed out during the review, also
> keeping in mind the what 'submitting-patches' says about submitting
> patches.

[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150038199212005
[2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150039142715304
[3] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150039054614993

Regards,
--
Alex