| Message ID | 20220829162502.886816-1-broonie@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | arm64/sve: Document our actual SVE syscall ABI | expand |
On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 05:24:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > v3: > - Rebase onto v6.0-rc3. > v2: > - Rebase onto v6.0-rc1. Please don't rebase beyond -rc1 unless it no longer applies cleanly. I came back from holiday and I have two or three versions of all of your patches in my inbox. It just adds to the clutter. Thanks.
On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 07:22:20PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 05:24:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > v3: > > - Rebase onto v6.0-rc3. > > v2: > > - Rebase onto v6.0-rc1. > Please don't rebase beyond -rc1 unless it no longer applies cleanly. I > came back from holiday and I have two or three versions of all of your > patches in my inbox. It just adds to the clutter. OK, sure. It might help to advertise what you're looking for here - the whole thing with wanting everything based off -rc3 has never been clear to me, IIRC I figured it out from some off hand comment rather than actually knowing what you and Will want. It's neither base off latest nor base off -rc1 which seem to be the more common policies.
On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 07:57:15PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 07:22:20PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2022 at 05:24:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > v3: > > > - Rebase onto v6.0-rc3. > > > v2: > > > - Rebase onto v6.0-rc1. > > > Please don't rebase beyond -rc1 unless it no longer applies cleanly. I > > came back from holiday and I have two or three versions of all of your > > patches in my inbox. It just adds to the clutter. > > OK, sure. It might help to advertise what you're looking for here - the > whole thing with wanting everything based off -rc3 has never been clear > to me, IIRC I figured it out from some off hand comment rather than > actually knowing what you and Will want. It's neither base off latest > nor base off -rc1 which seem to be the more common policies. Usually basing off -rc1 is sufficient unless the patches conflict with something newer and we occasionally push for-next/core to even higher -rcX. Of course, fixes for something in a late -rc should be based off that version. Both Will and I start queuing patches around -rc3 with the two weeks before pretty much reviewing or waiting to see if there are any more comments. I don't mind you basing your patches off -rc3 though in general it's better for series aimed at the upcoming merging window to be posted shortly after -rc1 to give them some more time on the list. However, once posted, if there are no changes please don't repost them for subsequent -rcX, it won't make any difference as we can just apply the original series to whatever we base for-next/core off. Thanks.
On Mon, 29 Aug 2022 17:24:59 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > Currently our SVE syscall ABI documentation does not reflect the actual > implemented ABI, it says that register state not shared with FPSIMD > becomes undefined on syscall when in reality we always clear it. Since > changing this would cause a change in the observed kernel behaviour > there is a substantial desire to avoid taking advantage of the > documented ABI so instead let's document what we actually do so it's > clear that it is in reality an ABI. > > [...] Applied to arm64 (for-next/kselftest), thanks! [1/3] kselftest/arm64: Correct buffer allocation for SVE Z registers https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/27f3d9e70fd8 [3/3] kselftest/arm64: Enforce actual ABI for SVE syscalls https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/9ccff5080758
On Mon, 29 Aug 2022 17:24:59 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > Currently our SVE syscall ABI documentation does not reflect the actual > implemented ABI, it says that register state not shared with FPSIMD > becomes undefined on syscall when in reality we always clear it. Since > changing this would cause a change in the observed kernel behaviour > there is a substantial desire to avoid taking advantage of the > documented ABI so instead let's document what we actually do so it's > clear that it is in reality an ABI. > > [...] Applied to arm64 (for-next/doc), thanks! [2/3] arm64/sve: Document our actual ABI for clearing registers on syscall https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/d09ee410a3c3