[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240312170111.GHZfCKV_brefr6M_2F@fat_crate.local>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 18:01:11 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/mm: Use IPIs to synchronize LAM enablement
On Tue, Mar 12, 2024 at 09:46:07AM -0700, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> Thanks for sharing that. I have always assumed this was about pinging
> or resending patches when reviews are taking too long. In this case, I
> was responding to review comments. Maybe I misinterpreted that.
So what I would do, for example, is send my set, collect review
comments, work them in, discuss them and once there are no more, I'll do
a rev+1, test and send again. Not under a week unless it is some really
serious bug.
This is a perfectly fine cadence.
> Anyway, sending a new version in the same day is too fast regardless.
> I did admit that already. My bad again :)
No worries. I'm saying this also for all the others who are reading. :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists