linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 02/48] perf stat: Add aggr creators that are passed a cpu.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b2377d2c-e061-fccd-c31d-589cba3ab1b6@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jan 2022 17:51:33 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
CC:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        "Namhyung Kim" <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "Paul A . Clarke" <pc@...ibm.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        "Riccardo Mancini" <rickyman7@...il.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vineet Singh <vineet.singh@...el.com>,
        "James Clark" <james.clark@....com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>, <coresight@...ts.linaro.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <zhengjun.xing@...el.com>,
        <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/48] perf stat: Add aggr creators that are passed a
 cpu.

On 10/01/2022 17:36, Ian Rogers wrote:
> I think you are asking to squash:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220105061351.120843-8-irogers@google.com/
> into this change. 

That's the general idea.

 > There are other similar related changes that may
 > also be squashed. The changes are trying to introduce a new API and
 > then add changes to switch over to using it. This is with a view to
 > making bisection easier, have each change only do 1 thing and so on. I
 > believe the format of the patches is house style, but it is fine to
 > squash changes together too. Having sent patches to Arnaldo and having
 > had them split I'm reluctant to do a v5 with them squashed without him
 > expressing a preference.
 >

I don't feel so strongly. But I do think that ability to review should 
take preference to providing simple bisections.

Anyway, I'll stop talking and actually have a look.

Cheers,
John