[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180206105310.2hi7mjqwu6tkm3lx@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 11:53:10 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] tooling headers: Synchronize updated s390 kvm UAPI
headers
* Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
> Arnaldo
>
> what is the proposed way of forwarding kvm uapi changes to the perf copy?
> Are you going to detect and fixup that yourself? Do you want to be notified?
> Or do you even want to have a patch?
Yes, that's the normal flow: you can just ignore any warnings, we are syncing the
headers up at around -rc1. (Many of them are already synced up.)
I.e. there's no constraint on kernel development and there's no need for you to
deal with tooling details.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists