Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1670321 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-06-20 08:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-06-21 02:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 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 v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-06-20 08:30 +0200
Re: [RFC v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> - 2017-06-21 02:20 +0200
| From | Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-20 08:30 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest |
| Message-ID | <tUkPL-4Yr-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On 06/17/2017 09:22 AM, Ram Pai wrote: > Added test support for PowerPC implementation off protection keys. > > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> First of all, there are a lot of instances where we use *pkru* named functions on power even the real implementations have taken care of doing appropriate things. That looks pretty hacky. We need to change them to generic names first before adding both x86 and powerpc procedures inside it.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-06-21 02:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tUBxg-7al-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1670321 |
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 11:56:04AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 06/17/2017 09:22 AM, Ram Pai wrote: > > Added test support for PowerPC implementation off protection keys. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> > > First of all, there are a lot of instances where we use *pkru* > named functions on power even the real implementations have > taken care of doing appropriate things. That looks pretty > hacky. We need to change them to generic names first before > adding both x86 and powerpc procedures inside it. I have abstracted out the arch-specific code. References to pkru should now be constricted to x86 code only. The patch, i acknowledge, is not easily reviewable. As Michael Ellermen mentioned I will break them into two patches. One moves the file and the second does the code changes. That way it will be easy to review. RP
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web