On 01/10/2013 12:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
So at that time how can the Signed-off from them?
And there are commits in the upstream does not have Signed-off from the Author.
I certainly hope those are a very very small number, if any.
There are indeed a handful, at which point the
On 01/10/2013 12:27 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
So at that time how can the Signed-off from them?
And there are commits in the upstream does not have Signed-off from the Author.
I certainly hope those are a very very small number, if any.
There are indeed a handful, at which point the
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:05:46AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > This is not how SOB chaining works:
> >
> > SOB: Author
> > SOB: Handler - this is you, who has added it to the patchset
> > SOB: Committer - maintainer
> >
> > You need to
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> This is not how SOB chaining works:
>
> SOB: Author
> SOB: Handler - this is you, who has added it to the patchset
> SOB: Committer - maintainer
>
> You need to read Documentation/SubmittingPatches if there's still things
> unclear.
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 05:56:07PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > Those -vXX version lines need to go under the "---" line. Alternatively,
> > you might want to add some of them to the commit message with a proper
> > explanation since they
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
This is not how SOB chaining works:
SOB: Author
SOB: Handler - this is you, who has added it to the patchset
SOB: Committer - maintainer
You need to read Documentation/SubmittingPatches if there's still things
unclear.
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:05:46AM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:19 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
This is not how SOB chaining works:
SOB: Author
SOB: Handler - this is you, who has added it to the patchset
SOB: Committer - maintainer
You need to
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 05:56:07PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
Those -vXX version lines need to go under the --- line. Alternatively,
you might want to add some of them to the commit message with a proper
explanation since
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> Those -vXX version lines need to go under the "---" line. Alternatively,
> you might want to add some of them to the commit message with a proper
> explanation since they are not that trivial at a first glance, for
> example the -v5, -v6,
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Borislav Petkov b...@alien8.de wrote:
Those -vXX version lines need to go under the --- line. Alternatively,
you might want to add some of them to the commit message with a proper
explanation since they are not that trivial at a first glance, for
example the
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 04:48:28PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> From: "H. Peter Anvin"
>
> two use cases:
> 1. We will support load and run kernel above 4G, and zero_page, ramdisk
>will be above 4G, too
> 2. need to access ramdisk early to get microcode to update that as
>early possible.
>
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 04:48:28PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
From: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com
two use cases:
1. We will support load and run kernel above 4G, and zero_page, ramdisk
will be above 4G, too
2. need to access ramdisk early to get microcode to update that as
early
From: "H. Peter Anvin"
two use cases:
1. We will support load and run kernel above 4G, and zero_page, ramdisk
will be above 4G, too
2. need to access ramdisk early to get microcode to update that as
early possible.
We could use early_iomap to access them, but it will make code to
messy
From: H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com
two use cases:
1. We will support load and run kernel above 4G, and zero_page, ramdisk
will be above 4G, too
2. need to access ramdisk early to get microcode to update that as
early possible.
We could use early_iomap to access them, but it will make code
14 matches
Mail list logo
