lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Apr]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 00/13] arm64: Branch Target Identification support
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 05:01:43PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:58:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:18:16PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:12:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > It's probably easier for me if you just use the existing branch, I've
> > > > already got a branch based on a merge down.
> >
> > > Okey doke, I'll funnel that in the direction of linux-next then. It does
> > > mean that any subsequent patches for 5.8 that depend on BTI will need to
> > > be based on this branch, so as long as you're ok with that then it's fine
> > > by me (since I won't be able to apply patches if they refer to changes
> > > introduced in the recent merge window).
> >
> > That's not a problem, that's what I've got already and if I try to send
> > everything based off -rc3 directly the series would get unmanagably
> > large. Actually unless you think it's a bad idea I think what I'll do
> > is go and send out a couple of the preparatory changes (the insn updates
> > and the last bit of annotation conversions) separately for that branch
> > while I finalize the revisions of the main BTI kernel bit, hopefully
> > that'll make the review a bit more approachable.
>
> Okey doke, sounds good to me. I'm queuing stuff atm, so as long you tell
> me what I need to apply things against then we should be good.

Just a heads up: I've renamed for-next/bti to for-next/bti-user, so it
doesn't get confusing with the pending in-kernel BTI patches. All the commit
SHAs remain unchanged.

Will

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-04-30 23:29    [W:0.059 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site