From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753598AbbAUPwM (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:52:12 -0500 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:47069 "EHLO out3-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750883AbbAUPwA (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jan 2015 10:52:00 -0500 Message-Id: <1421855519.163242.216784957.65B8D9AF@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: OWhLFiybmU3tQrUK3wHi2rPT+FijTmzAmxAxxEDda4tq 1421855519 From: Alexander van Heukelum To: Denys Vlasenko Cc: Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , X86 ML , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Frederic Weisbecker , Oleg Nesterov , Rik van Riel , Denys Vlasenko MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-46f3f2c7 Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 0/4] x86, entry: some cleanup and simplification... Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 16:51:59 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <1421581520-2816-1-git-send-email-heukelum@fastmail.fm> <20150118120503.GA3424@pd.tnic> <1421596051.2712080.215378161.2B6E3912@webmail.messagingengine.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 21, 2015, at 14:26, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Alexander van Heukelum > wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 18, 2015, at 13:05, Borislav Petkov wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> btw, you might wanna sync with Denys who's doing cleanups in that area too: > >> > >> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1421272101-16847-1-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com > >> > >> and touching some of the stuff you're changing too. > > > > Thanks. FWIW, the change touches the same area in code, but is orthogonal in concept. > > My patches eventually eliminate both ARGOFFSET and KERNEL_STACK_OFFSET. > For example, eventually TI_flags tests look like this after all my patches: > > testl $const, TI_flags+THREAD_INFO(%rsp,SIZEOF_PTREGS) > > Your patches massage the same defines in a different way than mine do. > We clearly have a conflict here. Indeed. I missed that, because Borislav's link only pointed to a single change and I failed to notice the "[01/11]" in the title.