diff for duplicates of <20140704165955.GL16404@arm.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 6a26eb4..5c9c711 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 04:51:31PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: -> On 4 July 2014 17:45, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> wrote: +> On 4 July 2014 17:45, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:09:06AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >> According to the UEFI spec section 2.3.6.4, the use of FP/SIMD instructions is > >> allowed, and should adhere to the AAPCS64 calling convention, which states that @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 04:51:31PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >> This applies equally to UEFI Runtime Services called by the kernel, so make sure > >> the FP/SIMD register file is preserved in this case. > >> -> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> +> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> > > > > While the code looks fine, I think there is a mismatch between what the > > subject says and what the patch does (enabling EFI_RUNTIME_WRAPPERS). @@ -26,4 +26,4 @@ On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 04:51:31PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: No, that's fine. You could just add the above explanation to the commit log. Otherwise: -Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> +Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 764a569..3af6edb 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -2,23 +2,14 @@ "ref\01403777346-28629-3-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org\0" "ref\020140704154522.GJ16404@arm.com\0" "ref\0CAKv+Gu947rsPRbWEY=TDBkkvoNanu-P+6Eej7Z3_crysx96F=g@mail.gmail.com\0" - "From\0Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>\0" - "Subject\0Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] efi/arm64: preserve FP/SIMD registers on UEFI runtime services calls\0" + "From\0catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)\0" + "Subject\0[PATCH v2 2/2] efi/arm64: preserve FP/SIMD registers on UEFI runtime services calls\0" "Date\0Fri, 4 Jul 2014 17:59:55 +0100\0" - "To\0Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>\0" - "Cc\0matt.fleming-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org <matt.fleming-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>" - x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org <x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> - linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org <linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org> - linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org <linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org> - hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org <hpa-YMNOUZJC4hwAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> - leif.lindholm-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org <leif.lindholm-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> - roy.franz-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org <roy.franz-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> - msalter-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org <msalter-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> - " Olivier Martin <Olivier.Martin-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>\0" + "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On Fri, Jul 04, 2014 at 04:51:31PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:\n" - "> On 4 July 2014 17:45, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> wrote:\n" + "> On 4 July 2014 17:45, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:\n" "> > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:09:06AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:\n" "> >> According to the UEFI spec section 2.3.6.4, the use of FP/SIMD instructions is\n" "> >> allowed, and should adhere to the AAPCS64 calling convention, which states that\n" @@ -28,7 +19,7 @@ "> >> This applies equally to UEFI Runtime Services called by the kernel, so make sure\n" "> >> the FP/SIMD register file is preserved in this case.\n" "> >>\n" - "> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>\n" + "> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>\n" "> >\n" "> > While the code looks fine, I think there is a mismatch between what the\n" "> > subject says and what the patch does (enabling EFI_RUNTIME_WRAPPERS).\n" @@ -45,6 +36,6 @@ "No, that's fine. You could just add the above explanation to the commit\n" "log. Otherwise:\n" "\n" - Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> + Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> -509f1800a6dae148a90d4b92ac996ed8583bb069d38211e5f6c8f0cac3a3d10f +ceac643384ed30967db1fb565c6ad349444b7a3e6f3df6bdc647862c31f5ab48
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.