linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 00/27] x86/resctrl: Move the resctrl filesystem code to /fs/resctrl

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: <b3e31246-52d7-42b8-97f7-35925c85ddb6@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 10:25:43 -0700
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, Babu Moger
	<Babu.Moger@....com>, <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>, "D Scott
 Phillips OS" <scott@...amperecomputing.com>, <carl@...amperecomputing.com>,
	<lcherian@...vell.com>, <bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com>,
	<tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>, <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, Jamie Iles
	<quic_jiles@...cinc.com>, Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	<peternewman@...gle.com>, <dfustini@...libre.com>, <amitsinght@...vell.com>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Rex Nie <rex.nie@...uarmicro.com>,
	"Dave Martin" <dave.martin@....com>, Koba Ko <kobak@...dia.com>, Shanker
 Donthineni <sdonthineni@...dia.com>, <fenghuay@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/27] x86/resctrl: Move the resctrl filesystem code to
 /fs/resctrl

Hi James,

On 5/7/25 9:49 AM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Reinette,
> 
> On 01/05/2025 18:51, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> On 4/25/25 10:37 AM, James Morse wrote:
>>> Changes since v8:
>>>  * Added check for closid_init() on monitor only platforms.
>>>  * Moved end-marker into array and added default cases.
>>>  * Additional patches to move prototpyes between header files.
>>>  
>>> Changes otherwise noted on each patch.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Patches 20-26 should be squashed together when merged, taking the commit message
>>
>> To make things as simple as possible this needs to be as detailed as possible. For
>> example, drop patch 21, *then* squash patches 20, 22 - 26. Having your repo as
>> reference is a great help.  
> 
> Ah - I thought I'd deleted the python script from the version posted!
> I'll tighten up that wording, it should really say which commit message to keep too.
> 
> If there is unlikely to be further review for those last patches, the other option is to
> do this for v9 - but point people at the earlier version if they want to see the changes
> broken out. This saves some work for the tip folk.

(v9 -> v10)

I do not know how much tip folk have been following this work. I also believe that 
any version should make things as simple and straightforward as possible. To that end
I am concerned about requiring folks to compare versions in order to understand a posting.
To me it sounds simpler to keep changes broken out. Personally I think squashing
clear broken out patches is simpler than trying to understand a bigger change by comparing
it to a different version of a series. Of course, this is my opinion with caveat that I
am not the one that will be doing this.

Reinette