On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 01:33:55PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Signed-off-by: Quentin Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
* Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Tested on x86.
>
> Acked-by: Ananth N Mavinakayahanalli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, Jan 01, 2008 at 04:19:43PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Quentin Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Since people are discussing some x86 Kprobes code cleanup, I thought I
> > would contribute a small change as well. When developing the Kprobes
> > arch code for ARM, I ran across
* Quentin Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Since people are discussing some x86 Kprobes code cleanup, I thought I
> would contribute a small change as well. When developing the Kprobes
> arch code for ARM, I ran across some code found in x86 and s390
> Kprobes arch code which I didn't cons
Since people are discussing some x86 Kprobes code cleanup, I thought
I would contribute a small change as well. When developing the
Kprobes arch code for ARM, I ran across some code found in x86 and
s390 Kprobes arch code which I didn't consider as good as it could
be.
Once I figured out what the
5 matches
Mail list logo