[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201103124202.GA5219@willie-the-truck>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 12:42:03 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] arm64: alternatives: Split up alternative.h
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 12:40:18PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 12:17:18PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > asm/alternative.h contains both the macros needed to use alternatives,
> > as well the type definitions and function prototypes for applying them.
> >
> > Split the header in two, so that alternatives can be used from core
> > header files such as linux/compiler.h without the risk of circular
> > includes
> >
> > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
>
> As a heads-up, the uaccess macro move will end up conflicting with my
> uaccess rework. I have a patch moving those out into asm/asm-uaccess.h:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201006144642.12195-9-mark.rutland@arm.com
>
> .... would you be happy to take that as a prep patch? Then in this
> patch you'd need to modify asm/asm-uaccess.h to include
> asm/alternative-macros.h.
Sure thing, I'll do that when I put the branch together.
> That wasy I can also carry that prep patch in the uaccess series, and
> avoid nasty merge conflicts, and it seems to make sense to factor out
> the uaccess bits anyway since they're not common alternative macros.
>
> The patch itself looks fine to me, so FWIW (ideally with the above):
>
> Acked-by: Mark Ryutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cheers!
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists