Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1571945 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] livepatch: hybrid consistency model

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.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] livepatch: hybrid consistency model Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-02-01 21:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] livepatch: hybrid consistency model Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz> - 2017-02-01 22:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] livepatch: hybrid consistency model Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> - 2017-02-01 22:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] livepatch: hybrid consistency model Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> - 2017-02-02 15:40 +0100

#1571945 — Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] livepatch: hybrid consistency model

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 09:46:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Here's v4, based on linux-next/master.  Mostly minor changes this time,
> primarily due to Petr's v3 comments.

So far, the only review comments have been related to the first patch,
of which I just posted an updated version.

If there are no more comments, it would be great to get these patches in
for the 4.11 merge window.  Any objections to that?

-- 
Josh

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1571972

On Wed, 1 Feb 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 09:46:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > Here's v4, based on linux-next/master.  Mostly minor changes this time,
> > primarily due to Petr's v3 comments.
> 
> So far, the only review comments have been related to the first patch,
> of which I just posted an updated version.

Yes, I'm really sorry about that. I'm going through the main patch of the 
series (13/15) and it's slow to explore all details. I know Petr is in the 
process too (and I think he has found some issues. He'll speak up.).
 
> If there are no more comments, it would be great to get these patches in
> for the 4.11 merge window.  Any objections to that?

That would be nice but I don't think it's realistic. The merge window is 
quite close and we still need to finish the review and get some Acks - 
at least arch maintainers and PeterZ and/or Ingo for rq lock.

It would be great to keep in next- for a while (one cycle) too.

Miroslav

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1571975

On Wed, 1 Feb 2017, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:

> If there are no more comments, it would be great to get these patches in 
> for the 4.11 merge window.  Any objections to that?

That'd mean that the exposure in -next would be really short, which I'd 
like to avoid. I'd love to tentatively target 4.12 though (I personally am 
still far from being done with reviewing the patchset myself, thanks a lot 
to Peter and Miroslav for doing all the heavy lifting on this front so 
far).

More importantly though, we're still missing quite some Acks from 
subsystem/arch maintainers. Namely, I'd really appreciate Acks for patches 
touching sched/idle.c and s390/x86/ppc arch specific bits from the 
respective maintainers.

Peter, Ingo, Heiko, Michael, please?

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1572406

On Wed 2017-02-01 14:02:43, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 09:46:08AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > Here's v4, based on linux-next/master.  Mostly minor changes this time,
> > primarily due to Petr's v3 comments.
> 
> So far, the only review comments have been related to the first patch,
> of which I just posted an updated version.
> 
> If there are no more comments, it would be great to get these patches in
> for the 4.11 merge window.  Any objections to that?

I have finished the review finally. We still need to address some
issues but I think that we are much more close now. I found only
few small problems. Othewise, the consistency handling looks pretty
consistent to me :-)

Best Regards,
Petr

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web