On 06/08/2016 02:23 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 06/07/2016 10:47 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> > Are there any concerns with merging these into the x86 tree so
>> > that they go upstream for 4.8?
> I believe we still don't have up-to-date man pages, right?
> Best from my POV to send
On 06/08/2016 02:23 AM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 06/07/2016 10:47 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> > Are there any concerns with merging these into the x86 tree so
>> > that they go upstream for 4.8?
> I believe we still don't have up-to-date man pages, right?
> Best from my POV to send
On 06/07/2016 10:47 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Are there any concerns with merging these into the x86 tree so
> that they go upstream for 4.8?
I believe we still don't have up-to-date man pages, right?
Best from my POV to send them out in parallel with the
implementation.
Cheers,
Michael
--
On 06/07/2016 10:47 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> Are there any concerns with merging these into the x86 tree so
> that they go upstream for 4.8?
I believe we still don't have up-to-date man pages, right?
Best from my POV to send them out in parallel with the
implementation.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Are there any concerns with merging these into the x86 tree so
that they go upstream for 4.8? The updates here are pretty
minor.
Changes from v1:
* updates to alloc/free patch description calling out that
"in-use" pkeys may still be pkey_free()'d successfully.
* Fixed a bug in the selftest
Are there any concerns with merging these into the x86 tree so
that they go upstream for 4.8? The updates here are pretty
minor.
Changes from v1:
* updates to alloc/free patch description calling out that
"in-use" pkeys may still be pkey_free()'d successfully.
* Fixed a bug in the selftest
6 matches
Mail list logo