(2014/11/27 19:52), Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Thu 2014-11-27 19:06:37, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> (2014/11/27 0:27), Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:18:24AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> Note to Steve:
>> Masami's IPMO
On Thu 2014-11-27 19:06:37, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2014/11/27 0:27), Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:18:24AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> >> On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >>
> Note to Steve:
> Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your t
(2014/11/27 0:27), Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:18:24AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>>
Note to Steve:
Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it
arrives,
I'll rebase and make the chang
(2014/11/26 18:18), Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
>>> Note to Steve:
>>> Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it
>>> arrives,
>>> I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for -next
>>> yet. This version
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 06:00:54PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2014/11/26 2:15), Seth Jennings wrote:
> > Note to Steve:
> > Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it
> > arrives,
> > I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for -next
> >
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:18:24AM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
> > > Note to Steve:
> > > Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it
> > > arrives,
> > > I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> What I'd propose instead is to make sure that we always have
> just a ftrace_ops per function entry, and only update the pointers there
"... just a _single_ ..."
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lin
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Note to Steve:
> > Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it
> > arrives,
> > I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for -next
> > yet. This version (v4) is for review and gathering acks.
>
>
(2014/11/26 2:15), Seth Jennings wrote:
> Note to Steve:
> Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it arrives,
> I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for -next
> yet. This version (v4) is for review and gathering acks.
BTW, as we discussed I
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Seth Jennings wrote:
> > I'd like to do quite some more testing and still finish some pending
> > portions of code reviews on our side (especially to make sure that this
> > can be easily extended to support any consistency model in the future).
>
> Without knowing how that
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 08:26:22PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Seth Jennings wrote:
>
> > Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it
> > arrives,
> > I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for -next
> > yet. This version
On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Seth Jennings wrote:
> Masami's IPMODIFY patch is heading for -next via your tree. Once it arrives,
> I'll rebase and make the change to set IPMODIFY. Do not pull this for -next
> yet. This version (v4) is for review and gathering acks.
Thanks for sending out v4 and incorp
12 matches
Mail list logo
