[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200131071716.GA9569@linux-b0ei>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 08:17:16 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@...e.cz>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@...hat.com>,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
bristot@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...nel.org, namit@...are.com, hpa@...or.com, luto@...nel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, live-patching@...r.kernel.org,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, nstange@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/ftrace: Use text_poke()
On Thu 2020-01-30 08:17:33, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 10:53:46AM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote:
> > On Wed 2020-01-29 09:59:51, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > > In retrospect, the prerequisites for merging it should have been:
> >
> > OK, let me do one more move in this game.
> >
> >
> > > 1) Document how source-based patches can be safely generated;
> >
> > I agree that the information are really scattered over many files
> > in Documentation/livepatch/.
>
> Once again you're blithely ignoring my point and pretending I'm saying
> something else. And you did that again further down in the email, but
> what's the point of arguing if you're not going to listen.
I have exactly the same feeling but the opposite way.
> I would ask that you please put on your upstream hats and stop playing
> politics. If the patch creation process is a secret, then by all means,
> keep it secret. But then keep your GCC flag to yourself.
The thing is that we do not have any magic secret.
Best Regards,
Petr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists