[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210615163245.26164-1-mark-pk.tsai@mediatek.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 00:32:45 +0800
From: Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
To: <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>,
<matthias.bgg@...il.com>, <mhelsley@...are.com>,
<peterz@...radead.org>, <samitolvanen@...gle.com>,
<yj.chiang@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] recordmcount: Correct st_shndx handling
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2021 14:47:20 +0800
> Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com> wrote:
>
> > One should only use st_shndx when >SHN_UNDEF and <SHN_LORESERVE. When
> > SHN_XINDEX, then use .symtab_shndx. Otherwise use 0.
> >
> > This handles the case: st_shndx >= SHN_LORESERVE && st_shndx != SHN_XINDEX.
> >
> > Reported-by: Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> > Tested-by: Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
>
> Please explain the two signed-off-by's above. If you are just tweaking
> Peter's original patch, please add at the start:
>
> From: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
>
> And then just above your signed off by, add what you changed:
>
> Tested-by: Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
> [ Changed something ]
> Signed-off-by: Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
>
> But state what you changed.
>
> Thanks!
>
> -- Steve
Sorry for messing up.
I've fixed it in v3.
Thanks for your comment.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists