On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:52:32PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:43:37PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Coding style violation: if a linux/foo.h exists then it must
> > be included in preference to asm/foo.h
> >
> > And the specific issue is that a follow-up
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:43:37PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Coding style violation: if a linux/foo.h exists then it must
> be included in preference to asm/foo.h
>
> And the specific issue is that a follow-up patch moves code from
> asm/mman.h to linux/mman.h so if any one was
On 2/8/19 1:43 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:42:39PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 01:02:53AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> Use linux/mman.h to make sure we get all mmap flags we need.
>> Why, asm/mman.h is not enough or is this fixing
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 04:42:39PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 01:02:53AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > Use linux/mman.h to make sure we get all mmap flags we need.
>
> Why, asm/mman.h is not enough or is this fixing a build issue or what is that
> patch
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 01:02:53AM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Use linux/mman.h to make sure we get all mmap flags we need.
Why, asm/mman.h is not enough or is this fixing a build issue or what is that
patch supposed to address?
>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
> ---
>
Use linux/mman.h to make sure we get all mmap flags we need.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin
---
arch/x86/mm/mpx.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c b/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c
index de1851d15699..c805db6236b4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/mpx.c
+++
6 matches
Mail list logo
