[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKwvOdkWcB6jhqpr6p3LQkJOOt2si3i=bTGM11Poz8cZypS5EA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 17:45:41 -0700
From: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paul Burton <paul.burton@...s.com>,
Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Behan Webster <behanw@...il.com>,
Behan Webster <behanw@...verseincode.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] compiler-attributes for v5.3-rc8
On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:08 PM Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 5:07 PM Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > So then Miguel should maybe split off a new branch, rebase to keep
> > just the relevant patch
> > (https://github.com/ojeda/linux/commit/c97e82b97f4bba00304905fe7965f923abd2d755),
> > and send a PR to you for inclusion in 5.3?
>
> Yes. With the appropriate test cycle
Sedat reported the issue and already tested/verified the fix. How
long should it sit in -next before sending a PR for inclusion to 5.3
(as opposed to letting it ride out to 5.4)?
> , particularly obviously clang
> (which I don't test in my own minor tests).
It's the devil's compiler; wouldn't recommend.
In all seriousness, I'm missing giving an update at LPC this year
(have a much more important meeting:
https://ironmaiden.com/tours/legacy-of-the-beast-tour-2019-2019/usa-oakland-ca-oracle-arena-2019-09-10),
but I'm always happy to answer questions related to it or take a look
at bug reports. Behan Webster is giving a talk about it at LPC
though! Check it out if you're at LPC.
--
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers
Powered by blists - more mailing lists