[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <379e34f0065552384a2dea12d1726c6727763b8a.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 21:25:52 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "janusz.krzysztofik@...ux.intel.com"
<janusz.krzysztofik@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
CC: "Gross, Jurgen" <jgross@...e.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Marczykowski, Marek" <marmarek@...isiblethingslab.com>,
"andi.shyti@...ux.intel.com" <andi.shyti@...ux.intel.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND] x86/mm: Fix PAT bit missing from page
protection modify mask
On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 11:45 +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> I could add your comment and resubmit, but my experience from
> communication
> with audience of this patch tells me that silence means rather no
> acceptance.
I don't think adding a comment to explain tricky hidden details would
typically be controversial. I'd say to comment both if there are more.
But I'll leave you to it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists