[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANiq72nkQBYnDM2QLKJvAaMJ6iCB=oXg1UZRbpXbf732f1OyZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:18:24 +0200
From: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
Eli Friedman <efriedma@...eaurora.org>,
Christopher Li <sparse@...isli.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] Compiler Attributes: naked can be shared
On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 9:22 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> For this instance, I think we should just revert the offending patch,
> which should resolve the issue for everyone and then you can try to redo
> your series to get it right the next time.
>
> Sound good?
On one hand, "reverting & retrying" is a good default policy. On the
other hand, we are already in -rc4 (i.e. we lose the testing done
until now --- note that in this case the revert implies a global
change). So whatever makes you guys feel more comfortable.
Cheers,
Miguel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists