The pull request you sent on Sun, 31 Mar 2019 10:39:43 -:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git x86-urgent-for-linus
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/915ee0da5ecb7ac7fd023ae36f01c47ce47a45d1
Thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a
The pull request you sent on Sun, 24 Mar 2019 14:12:21 -:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git x86-urgent-for-linus
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/19caf581ba441659f1a71e9a5baed032fdcfceef
Thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a
The pull request you sent on Sun, 03 Feb 2019 17:16:07 +0100:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git x86-urgent-for-linus
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/24b888d8d59847871387aa3b241b524661070a6e
Thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a
The pull request you sent on Sun, 27 Jan 2019 12:05:08 +0100:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git x86-urgent-for-linus
has been merged into torvalds/linux.git:
https://git.kernel.org/torvalds/c/8a5f06056a25ac7dbca2b0505cc0fe8ffb6947c1
Thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a
* Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> > Just did 2 suspend cycles (once to RAM and once to disk) on my x230
> > with your tree from right now and it looks ok so far. So it could be
> > machine- and config-specific...
>
> .. and it's not repeata
On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 1:48 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> Just did 2 suspend cycles (once to RAM and once to disk) on my x230
> with your tree from right now and it looks ok so far. So it could be
> machine- and config-specific...
.. and it's not repeatable for me. I rebooted pretty quickly, an
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 09:02:36PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git
> > x86-asm-for-linus
>
> Hmm #2.
>
> My laptop had odd SIGBUS and IO errors after a suspend/resume cycle
>
On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git x86-asm-for-linus
Hmm #2.
My laptop had odd SIGBUS and IO errors after a suspend/resume cycle
when running commit d6ec9d9a4def, which is after my merge of the x86
core changes.
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> Fail on me. I got rushed and sloppy. I really need to automate looking
>> for warnings pre-commit and not rely on Fengguang's robot.
>
> /me too. I took it for granted that this was tested b
On Sat, 13 Jul 2013, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Fail on me. I got rushed and sloppy. I really need to automate looking
> for warnings pre-commit and not rely on Fengguang's robot.
/me too. I took it for granted that this was tested by Ingos machinery
w/o noticing that it went in just when Ingo lef
Fail on me. I got rushed and sloppy. I really need to automate looking
for warnings pre-commit and not rely on Fengguang's robot.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at
On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 4:21 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>* Guarantee IDT page alignment
What the F*CK, guys?
This piece-of-shit commit is marked for stable, but you clearly never
even test-compiled it, did you?
Because on x86-64 (the which is the only place where the patch
matters), I don
* Randy Dunlap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What happened to the kernel-doc x86/cpu/mtrr patch, which you applied,
> according to your email reply...
you can see the latest & greatest arch/x86 patches in the
x86.git#testing branch. Here is how you can track it:
http://people.redhat.com/min
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:13:13 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > Linus,
> >
> > please pull x86 updates from:
> >
> > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
> > master
> >
> > The major part of this pull are spa
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:13:13 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Linus,
>
> please pull x86 updates from:
>
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
> master
>
> The major part of this pull are sparse fixes, section fixups,
> documentation updates and cleanup
* Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> thanks, applied - this first looked like a KVM item, that's why i
>> havent added it. [Btw., feel free to push it via kvm.git as well - as
>> long as you are sure it does not break the build ;-) ]
>
> Yeah, I'm queuing it as well, it will get there one
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Ingo, could you also please consider the KVM build fix at
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120262794315024&w=2 which has been
>>> acked by Avi. I suspect this patch should be route through git-x86
Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ingo, could you also please consider the KVM build fix at
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120262794315024&w=2 which has been
acked by Avi. I suspect this patch should be route through git-x86
since it affects arch/x86/Kconfig.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 04:19:53PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > Thomas Gleixner (1):
> > > x86: EFI: fix use of unitialized variable and the cache logic
> >
> > Your honor, I would like to re
* Balbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ingo, could you also please consider the KVM build fix at
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120262794315024&w=2 which has been
> acked by Avi. I suspect this patch should be route through git-x86
> since it affects arch/x86/Kconfig.
thanks, appli
* Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Thomas Gleixner (1):
> > x86: EFI: fix use of unitialized variable and the cache logic
>
> Your honor, I would like to register a differing opinion...
As i mentioned it (in the portion of my email th
Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Thomas Gleixner (1):
> x86: EFI: fix use of unitialized variable and the cache logic
Your honor, I would like to register a differing opinion...
I submitted that fix originally in a different form, but it
got finally stripped down to this. However
Ingo, could you also please consider the KVM build fix at
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=120262794315024&w=2 which has been
acked by Avi. I suspect this patch should be route through git-x86
since it affects arch/x86/Kconfig.
Balbir
PS: Modified cc's to reduce the noise.
--
To unsubscribe fro
* Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >
> > So Thomas, don't do this. I don't like it. The same way I didn't like
> > seeing Ingo trying to mix in a kgdb pull into his x86 pull. Keep these
> > thi
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
> So Thomas, don't do this. I don't like it. The same way I didn't like
> seeing Ingo trying to mix in a kgdb pull into his x86 pull. Keep these
> things separate - git is *really* good at having multiple bran
On Sat, 9 Feb 2008, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 00:24:50 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > Linus,
> >
> > please pull the pending x86 updates from:
> >
> > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
> > master
>
> Hi Thomas,
> can we please
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 00:24:50 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Linus,
>
> please pull the pending x86 updates from:
>
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
> master
Hi Thomas,
can we please get diffstats with git pull requests?
(in the future)
> The up
Ingo Molnar wrote:
I also did a quick skimming of info ld - but no luck.
Peter pointed me to "info gas", which has a "Sections and Relocation"
chapter.
Also see the ".section" directive under pseudo-ops (in the gas doc.)
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
* Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > btw., what's the practical consequence of getting these section
> > flags wrong - for example writable data can end up in executable
> > section accidentally and be marked readonly by RODATA? Or can
> > anything more serious happen? (they cannot get
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Well, the real question is "what are the defaults"
Well, I guess my point was that we shouldn't rely on the defaults.
By default:
.bssis (aw,nobits).
.data is (aw,progbits).
.rodata is (a,progbits).
.text is (ax,progbits).
But what about something like ".ini
* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ingo, Thomas,
> should we not do this?
>
> Otherwise, it seems we generate a section that isn't allocated?
>
> I think toolchain should add the right flags automatically for
> sections that start with ".[ro]data" and ".text", but not for the
> ke
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> The difference is quite simple:
>
> a - this section occupies address space
> w - this section is writable
> x - this section is executable
> progbits- this section has data i
Sam Ravnborg wrote:
Technically we should also specify @progbits or @nobits on sections,
however, I think @progbits is the default.
I have on my todo list to do so. But I wanted to investigate a bit
more since I do not yet fully understand the difference.
And we have to use %progbits and %no
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 01:09:28PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> >btw., what's the practical consequence of getting these section flags
> >wrong - for example writable data can end up in executable section
> >accidentally and be marked readonly by RODATA? Or can anything
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:05:08PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:47:07AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Ingo, Thomas,
> > > should we not do this?
> > >
> > > Otherwise, it seems we generate a section t
Ingo Molnar wrote:
btw., what's the practical consequence of getting these section flags
wrong - for example writable data can end up in executable section
accidentally and be marked readonly by RODATA? Or can anything more
serious happen? (they cannot get into any of the discarded sections,
* Sam Ravnborg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:47:07AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > Ingo, Thomas,
> > should we not do this?
> >
> > Otherwise, it seems we generate a section that isn't allocated?
> >
> > I think toolchain should add the right flags automa
Linus Torvalds wrote:
Ingo, Thomas,
should we not do this?
Otherwise, it seems we generate a section that isn't allocated?
I think toolchain should add the right flags automatically for sections
that start with ".[ro]data" and ".text", but not for the kernel-specific
".init.*" sections.
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:47:07AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> Ingo, Thomas,
> should we not do this?
>
> Otherwise, it seems we generate a section that isn't allocated?
>
> I think toolchain should add the right flags automatically for sections
> that start with ".[ro]data" and ".text
Ingo, Thomas,
should we not do this?
Otherwise, it seems we generate a section that isn't allocated?
I think toolchain should add the right flags automatically for sections
that start with ".[ro]data" and ".text", but not for the kernel-specific
".init.*" sections.
Linus
--
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linus, please pull the latest x86 git tree from:
>
>git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
>
> Thanks!
just updated it: added a fix for a sparsemem bootup crash on large-RAM
boxes, and removed the documentation update
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Heh. I applied it just before pulling, so it's there twice.
.. btw, Thomas, you forgot to add your sign-off to your version.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> Just added Sam's latest fix for the x86 build mechanism on top of the
> patches below.
Heh. I applied it just before pulling, so it's there twice. Git obviously
then merged it without problems, so I didn't even notice until you
mentioned it (be
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Linus,
>
> please pull x86 updates for 2.6.24 from:
>
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
> master
>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
FYI,
Just added Sam's latest fix for the x86 build mechanism on top of the patch
Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 23:02 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Linus,
>>
>> please pull from:
>>
>> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
>>
>> This contains a couple of bug fixes and a large cleanup and
>> unification section from various a
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 09:17 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > X86_32 build fix to commit 62a31a03b3d2a9d20e7a073e2cd9b27bfb7d6a3f
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > thanks - this is needed for CONFIG_KEXEC builds. Adde
* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > X86_32 build fix to commit 62a31a03b3d2a9d20e7a073e2cd9b27bfb7d6a3f
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> thanks - this is needed for CONFIG_KEXEC builds. Added to the queue.
hm, CONFIG_KEXEC builds fine even on 32-bit here -
* Mike Galbraith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 23:02 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Linus,
> >
> > please pull from:
> >
> > ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
> >
> > This contains a couple of bug fixes and a large cleanup and
> >
On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 23:02 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Linus,
>
> please pull from:
>
> ssh://master.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-x86.git
>
> This contains a couple of bug fixes and a large cleanup and
> unification section from various authors.
X86_32 build fix to
49 matches
Mail list logo
