Re: [GIT PULL] s390 updates for 2.6.28-rc1

[Ingo Molnar]

* Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 12:51 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 13:37 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > * Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > The s390 vdso preparation patch "arch_setup_additional_pages argument" 
> > > > > touches other architectures (x86, sh and powerpc):
> > > > > 
> > > > > arch_setup_additional_pages currently gets two arguments, the binary 
> > > > > format descripton and an indication if the process uses an executable 
> > > > > stack or not. The second argument is not used by anybody, it could be 
> > > > > removed without replacement.
> > > > 
> > > > hm, this is the first time i've seen this change,
> > > 
> > > The code is relatively new and I planned it for the merge window for 
> > > 2.6.29. I still have to nag our performance team to do some tests 
> > > with it.
> > 
> > okay, then i'm confused, the subject line says v2.6.28:
> > 
> >     [GIT PULL] s390 updates for 2.6.28-rc1
> > 
> > (i have still no objections to those small x86 bits.)
> 
> Yeah, that was a misunderstanding between Heiko and me. I planned it 
> for 2.6.29 and didn't tell him about it before I left for vacation. 
> Heiko just went ahead and added it the 2.6.28-rc1 pull request.

ah, that's the happy variant.

> > it's just a historic/quirky connection (non-executable stack was 
> > the first and biggest step towards a more flexible address space 
> > layout) - you were correct to have it cleaned up.
> 
> Ok, thanks. Less confused now.

maybe someone gets interested in cleaning up those bits. Our ASRL-fu 
is still a bit ... random all around.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/