[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YL+66gKKW5CQjq5f@zn.tnic>
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 20:46:02 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@...el.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
kbuild-all@...ts.01.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/cpu 4/4] Warning: Kernel ABI header at
'tools/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h' differs from latest version at
'arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h': 111< /* free (
3*32+29) */
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 03:06:57PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Or, if we start doing that then they don't have to do anything.
>
> Who? Previously its me doing this work, i.e. keeping things in synch.
> Actually it is expected that people doing the kernel work don't touch
> tools/ wrt adding the copy,
Ok, I think I'm totally confused. First you say that you're trying to
keep the headers in sync and now you say that patches adding stuff to
the kernel cpufeatures.h header should not touch the copy in tools/...
In any case, I was thinking that we could document what people touching
cpufeatures.h need to do and put it Documentation/x86/cpuinfo.rst.
And then spread the load by asking everyone to do that test and fix the
perf build accordingly.
So that you don't have to do it all by yourself.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists