On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 05:48:17PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Thanks for the review, very good points. I had spotted some of them > myself but had to restrain myself not to do them now for the very > simple reason: we want this code first cleaned up nicely, in small and > self-contained pieces so that no regressions get introduced from more > involved patches (debugging early microcode loader issues is nasty). > > Then we can start improving it, once enough rust is shaken off.
Yup that's how I understood your patchset :) If I may though, I think the issue I raised on your patch 8 is serious enough to get a fix before you merge this patchset - it should just be a matter of adding some parentheses at the correct place, and should be a good candidate for -stable. > > Now, I have limited time so, if, in case you wanted to do small and > clean patchsets cleaning up this more or improving some aspects of it > and tested them and sent them to me, I'll gladly give them a good look > and test them here too. :-) > > But you don't have to, this is just a suggestion anyway - I just get the > feeling that you like looking at it and wanted to mention that in case > you'd like to help out cleaning it up, you're welcome to do so. > I have also very limited time to allocate for this, but I can surely help with reviewing. If I manage to get some spare time, I'll make sure to try to contribute as well, no guarantee for now though! Quentin -- 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 http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
