Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/5] ARM: kprobes-test: use <asm/opcodes.h> for instruction accesses | From | "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <> | Date | Thu, 09 Jan 2014 11:04:51 +0000 |
| |
On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 12:54 +0200, Taras Kondratiuk wrote: > On 3 January 2014 17:53, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) <tixy@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-12-23 at 18:19 +0200, Taras Kondratiuk wrote: > >> From: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> > >> > >> Ensure we read instructions in the correct endian-ness by using > >> the <asm/opcodes.h> helper to transform them as necessary. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> > >> [taras.kondratiuk@linaro.org: fix next_instruction() function] > >> Signed-off-by: Taras Kondratiuk <taras.kondratiuk@linaro.org> > >> --- > > > > Apart from the spurious line removal (see below) then: > > > > Acked-by: Jon Medhurst <tixy@linaro.org> > > > > and you can include an ACK for the other patches in this series too. > > > > Thanks. > > >> @@ -1593,7 +1594,6 @@ static int run_test_cases(void (*tests)(void), const union decode_item *table) > >> return 0; > >> } > >> > >> - > > > > I know the above blank line isn't needed but I believe the convention is > > to avoid doing unrelated white-space clean-ups in patches. > > Right, I will remove it. > Should this series go through Russell's patch tracking system or it > can be pulled > to some tree?
I would assume as a pull request sent to Russell using the email alias he uses for these things: linux+pull@arm.linux.org.uk I'm sure he's shout up if I'm wrong...
-- Tixy
| |