Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86: Use "er" asm constriant for add/sub

[Borislav Petkov]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 04:20:29AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> I've dropped the branch from IIO. That's fine because it was still being
> tested and hasn't gone out as non-rebasing yet.

Ack, will do first thing tomorrow.

> Next time I'll maybe find an IRC gateway and ping you on that.  I can't
> find any reference to that being your preference in the kernel docs.
> Given you have a helpful page on tip, might be worth adding a note.
> I might of course be missing it.

I'll send you a private note after this.

> If it goes into a reasonably early rc, I'll just merge the relevant rc
> rather than needing an immutable. If next cycle, immutable please.

First one can go to Linus now, second one would go next cycle. Do you want to
base ontop of both?

> I started out a bit grumpy that I had to hold a non trivial series for
> a cycle because of an x86 bug (having been very happy when David
> fixed it incredibly quickly!), that got reviewed then disappeared
> down a hole and didn't look like it would ever be seen again.
> Meh, got me on a belligerent day.

No worries, happens to all of us.

Thanks!

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette