From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5] helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.85_2 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1bi1B3-0001If-3k for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 15:23:46 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id u88FMa8c136948 for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 11:23:21 -0400 Received: from e24smtp04.br.ibm.com (e24smtp04.br.ibm.com [32.104.18.25]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 25ataym051-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2016 11:23:20 -0400 Received: from localhost by e24smtp04.br.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 8 Sep 2016 12:23:18 -0300 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann Subject: Re: Kexec regression in next-20160906 Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 12:23:13 -0300 In-Reply-To: <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20160906220936.4txqzodkgknhjiyh@atomide.com> <2229914.bQjEFCIRgO@hactar> <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <8729269.3rIvqbaU1r@hactar> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Tony Lindgren , Mimi Zohar , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Eric Biederman , linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Andrew Morton , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Dave Young , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Am Mittwoch, 07 September 2016, 09:08:07 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux: > Any change to a UAPI header needs to be carefully considered and > questioned as it is always a potential userspace breakage - and in > the kernel, we're supposed to be doing our up-most to avoid > breaking userspace. > > It's not like it was in the old days when we didn't have the UAPI > seperate - today, we can find these things by looking at the patch > diffstat and seeing whether any file in "uapi" is touched. That > should be the trigger for a really in-depth review of the change. No UAPI header is touched by this patch series. That is because there are two definitions of struct kexec_segment, one in include/linux/kexec.h and the other one in include/uapi/linux/kexec.h. My patch changed the former. I was unaware of the second definition in the latter. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann Subject: Re: Kexec regression in next-20160906 Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 12:23:13 -0300 Message-ID: <8729269.3rIvqbaU1r@hactar> References: <20160906220936.4txqzodkgknhjiyh@atomide.com> <2229914.bQjEFCIRgO@hactar> <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Tony Lindgren , Andrew Morton , Eric Biederman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Dave Young , Mimi Zohar , linux-ima-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Am Mittwoch, 07 September 2016, 09:08:07 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux: > Any change to a UAPI header needs to be carefully considered and > questioned as it is always a potential userspace breakage - and in > the kernel, we're supposed to be doing our up-most to avoid > breaking userspace. > > It's not like it was in the old days when we didn't have the UAPI > seperate - today, we can find these things by looking at the patch > diffstat and seeing whether any file in "uapi" is touched. That > should be the trigger for a really in-depth review of the change. No UAPI header is touched by this patch series. That is because there are two definitions of struct kexec_segment, one in include/linux/kexec.h and the other one in include/uapi/linux/kexec.h. My patch changed the former. I was unaware of the second definition in the latter. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Thiago Jung Bauermann) Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2016 12:23:13 -0300 Subject: Kexec regression in next-20160906 In-Reply-To: <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20160906220936.4txqzodkgknhjiyh@atomide.com> <2229914.bQjEFCIRgO@hactar> <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <8729269.3rIvqbaU1r@hactar> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Am Mittwoch, 07 September 2016, 09:08:07 schrieb Russell King - ARM Linux: > Any change to a UAPI header needs to be carefully considered and > questioned as it is always a potential userspace breakage - and in > the kernel, we're supposed to be doing our up-most to avoid > breaking userspace. > > It's not like it was in the old days when we didn't have the UAPI > seperate - today, we can find these things by looking at the patch > diffstat and seeing whether any file in "uapi" is touched. That > should be the trigger for a really in-depth review of the change. No UAPI header is touched by this patch series. That is because there are two definitions of struct kexec_segment, one in include/linux/kexec.h and the other one in include/uapi/linux/kexec.h. My patch changed the former. I was unaware of the second definition in the latter. -- []'s Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center