From: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@gmail.com>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/boot] x86/bootflag: Replace open-coded parity calculation with parity8()
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 22:47:53 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z9BNGeZBh/6gJfHT@visitorckw-System-Product-Name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <174066211374.10177.8948394435153413345.tip-bot2@tip-bot2>
Hi Ingo,
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 01:15:13PM -0000, tip-bot2 for Kuan-Wei Chiu wrote:
> The following commit has been merged into the x86/boot branch of tip:
>
> Commit-ID: 9c94c14ca39577b6324c667d8450ffa19fc1e5c4
> Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/9c94c14ca39577b6324c667d8450ffa19fc1e5c4
> Author: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>
> AuthorDate: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 13:55:45 +01:00
> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> CommitterDate: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 14:00:30 +01:00
>
> x86/bootflag: Replace open-coded parity calculation with parity8()
>
> Refactor parity calculations to use the standard parity8() helper. This
> change eliminates redundant implementations and improves code
> efficiency.
>
> [ ubizjak: Updated the patch to apply to the latest x86 tree. ]
>
> Co-developed-by: Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yu-Chun Lin <eleanor15x@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kuan-Wei Chiu <visitorckw@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250227125616.2253774-1-ubizjak@gmail.com
Thanks for accepting this patch.
Based on the previous email discussion, I plan to rename parity8() to
parity_odd() in the next version of the parity patch series (though I'm
not too confident it will be accepted...). If I base the series on the
current linux-next tree, it might cause conflicts when other
maintainers apply it to their own trees. On the other hand, if I base
it on Linus's tree, it would conflict with the x86 tree.
I'm not sure which tree I should base the next version on. Since this
series touches multiple subsystems, the situation is a bit tricky.
Regards,
Kuan-Wei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-11 14:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-27 12:55 [PATCH] x86/bootflag: Replace open-coded parity calculation with parity8() Uros Bizjak
2025-02-27 13:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2025-02-27 13:15 ` [tip: x86/boot] " tip-bot2 for Kuan-Wei Chiu
2025-03-11 14:47 ` Kuan-Wei Chiu [this message]
2025-02-27 13:21 ` [PATCH] " Kuan-Wei Chiu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Z9BNGeZBh/6gJfHT@visitorckw-System-Product-Name \
--to=visitorckw@gmail.com \
--cc=eleanor15x@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox