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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <18608081-98df-77bb-4163-f3e2d0dae3d3@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:53:51 +0300
From:   Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...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

Hi,

On 19.07.2017 8:48, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> 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

Well, ok. I see you point. Do you want me to restructure the whole patchset 
or clarify more on some parts of the current set?

> 
> Regards,
> --
> Alex
> 

Thanks,
Alexey