[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190503134118.GA5602@osiris>
Date: Fri, 3 May 2019 15:41:19 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
To: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
Cc: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
oss-drivers@...ronome.com,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 13/17] s390: bpf: eliminate zero extension
code-gen
On Fri, May 03, 2019 at 11:42:40AM +0100, Jiong Wang wrote:
> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
> Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
When sending patches which affect s390, could you please add Martin
and me on cc to _all_ patches? We now received only the cover-letter
plus one patch. It's always hard in such cirumstances to figure out if
the code is doing the right thing.
Usually I end up looking up the missing patches within other mailing
lists, however I haven't subscribed the bpf and netdev mailing lists.
The extra e-mail volume because of being added to CC really doesn't
matter at all.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists