From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2016 07:40:07 +0000 Subject: Re: sparc: bpf_jit: Rename jump labels in bpf_jit_compile() Message-Id: <24817d27-2e33-2c6d-c439-032e9241d832@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <1365a588-c7c7-717c-1e3d-ceabd71e8479@users.sourceforge.net> <20160903.235916.1892276070318494855.davem@davemloft.net> <20160904.003221.1058212775653805315.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20160904.003221.1058212775653805315.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: David Miller Cc: Daniel Borkmann , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Adam Buchbinder , Alexei Starovoitov , Rabin Vincent , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall , Paolo Bonzini , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare > It's not because I find improvements "uncomfortable", but rather it's > because your changes are not seen as improvements in the first place. What is your software development opinion for the update step "[1/4] sparc: bpf_jit: Use kmalloc_array() in bpf_jit_compile()" from this small patch series? Regards, Markus