On 09/08/2022 16:08, Johannes Berg wrote:
> [...]
>> Perfect, thank you! Let me take the opportunity to ask you something I'm
>> asking all the maintainers involved here - do you prefer taking the
>> patch through your tree, or to get it landed with the whole series, at
>> once, from some maintaine
On Tue, 2022-08-09 at 16:03 -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 09/08/2022 15:09, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > V2:
> > > > - Kept the notifier header to avoid implicit usage - thanks
> > > > Johannes for the suggestion!
> > > >
> > > > arch/um/drivers/mconsole_kern.c | 7 +++
> >
On 09/08/2022 15:09, Johannes Berg wrote:
> [...]
>>> V2:
>>> - Kept the notifier header to avoid implicit usage - thanks
>>> Johannes for the suggestion!
>>>
>>> arch/um/drivers/mconsole_kern.c | 7 +++
>>> arch/um/kernel/um_arch.c| 8
>>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 8
On Sun, 2022-08-07 at 12:40 -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 19/07/2022 16:53, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> > Currently the panic notifiers from user mode linux don't follow
> > the convention for most of the other notifiers present in the
> > kernel (indentation, priority setting, numeric
On 19/07/2022 16:53, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> Currently the panic notifiers from user mode linux don't follow
> the convention for most of the other notifiers present in the
> kernel (indentation, priority setting, numeric return).
> More important, the priorities could be improved, since it's
Currently the panic notifiers from user mode linux don't follow
the convention for most of the other notifiers present in the
kernel (indentation, priority setting, numeric return).
More important, the priorities could be improved, since it's a
special case (userspace), hence we could run the notif
