[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJD7tkbjdsJ5Man6hGt-eNGdxcqq4=xj-AFhkCXgun=FbdcBTg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 10:05:12 -0700
From: Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
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 10:01 AM Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> 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.
Makes sense to me, thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists