* Re: Kexec regression in next-20160906
[not found] ` <20160907080807.GD5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
@ 2016-09-08 15:23 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann @ 2016-09-08 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Russell King - ARM Linux
Cc: Tony Lindgren, Mimi Zohar, linuxppc-dev, kexec, linux-kernel,
Eric Biederman, linux-ima-devel, Andrew Morton, linux-omap,
Dave Young, linux-arm-kernel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread