Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1551492 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-01-05 00:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2017-01-05 01:00 +0100 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [RFC PATCH v3] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI) Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-05 00:40 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH v3] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI) Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@oracle.com> - 2017-01-05 00:50 +0100
Re: [RFC PATCH v3] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI) Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-01-05 01:00 +0100
| From | Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 00:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v3] sparc64: Add support for Application Data Integrity (ADI) |
| Message-ID | <sW3jX-37n-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
One other high-level comment: It would be nice to see the arch-independent and x86 portions broken out and explained in their own right, even if they're small patches. It's a bit cruel to make us scroll through a thousand lines of sparc code to see the bits interesting to us. It would also be really nice to see a high-level breakdown explaining what you had to modify, especially since this affects all of the system calls that take a PROT_* argument. The sample code is nice, but it's no substitute for writing it down.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@oracle.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 00:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sW3tE-3b2-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1551492 |
On 01/04/2017 04:31 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > One other high-level comment: It would be nice to see the > arch-independent and x86 portions broken out and explained in their own > right, even if they're small patches. It's a bit cruel to make us > scroll through a thousand lines of sparc code to see the bits > interesting to us. Sure, that is very reasonable. I will do that. > > It would also be really nice to see a high-level breakdown explaining > what you had to modify, especially since this affects all of the system > calls that take a PROT_* argument. The sample code is nice, but it's no > substitute for writing it down. I will expand the explanation in Documentation/sparc/adi.txt. Thanks! -- Khalid
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-01-05 01:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sW3Dk-3ex-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1551506 |
On 01/04/2017 03:46 PM, Khalid Aziz wrote: >> It would also be really nice to see a high-level breakdown explaining >> what you had to modify, especially since this affects all of the system >> calls that take a PROT_* argument. The sample code is nice, but it's no >> substitute for writing it down. > > I will expand the explanation in Documentation/sparc/adi.txt. I think (partially) duplicating that in a cover letter would also be nice. The documentation is a bit buried in the 1,000 lines of code.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web