From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] libelf: add `struct elf_binary*'
 parameter to elf_load_image
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 12:01:04 +0100
Message-ID: <51AF1A70.2060605@citrix.com>
References: <1370368803-9436-1-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
	<1370368803-9436-4-git-send-email-ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
	<CAFLBxZZwKp1HZD2XDZ9vJhRwiHuvWXSXhM_vMt6GBWBhDNEfZw@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAFLBxZZwKp1HZD2XDZ9vJhRwiHuvWXSXhM_vMt6GBWBhDNEfZw@mail.gmail.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "mattjd@gmail.com" <mattjd@gmail.com>, "security@xen.org" <security@xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 05/06/13 11:32, George Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
>> The meat of this function is going to need a copy of the elf pointer,
>> in forthcoming patches.
>>
>> No functional change in this patch.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
>> Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> Is there any reason not to commit the patches that have been acked and
> reviewed, so we can start getting stuff tested sooner (and reduce the
> cognitive load on you of having to deal with 16 patches)?
>
>  -George

I would certainly appreciate a reduction of cognative load.

>>From the series, I believe that patches 1-6 are sufficiently simple and
obviously correct.

~Andrew