Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/12] Reduce ifdef mess in ptrace
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
Cc:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <cover.1561735587.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
 <f62b0f67-c418-3734-0b07-65aea7537a78@c-s.fr>
 <7b86733f81c7e15d81ab14b98c8998011ed54880.camel@neuling.org>
 <5b5d8f61-c9aa-1afd-6001-44a17f00c1a6@c-s.fr>
 <8736b01cjb.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Message-ID: <310bc462-2c07-67f4-5e30-3acb02f25245@c-s.fr>
Date:   Wed, 26 Feb 2020 13:03:55 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8736b01cjb.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


Le 24/02/2020 à 11:54, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:
>> Le 24/02/2020 à 03:15, Michael Neuling a écrit :
>>> Christophe,
>>>> Le 28/06/2019 à 17:47, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
>>>>> The purpose of this series is to reduce the amount of #ifdefs
>>>>> in ptrace.c
>>>>
>>>> Any feedback on this series which aims at fixing the issue you opened at
>>>> https://github.com/linuxppc/issues/issues/128 ?
>>>
>>> Yeah, sorry my bad. You did all the hard work and I ignored it.
>>>
>>> I like the approach and is a long the lines I was thinking. Putting it in a
>>> ptrace subdir, splitting out adv_debug_regs, TM, SPE, Alitivec, VSX.
>>> ppc_gethwdinfo() looks a lot nicer now too (that was some of the worst of it).
>>>
>>> I've not gone through it with a fine tooth comb though. There is (rightly) a lot
>>> of code moved around which could have introduced some issues.
>>>
>>> It applies on v5.2 but are you planning on updating it to a newer base?
>>>
>>
>> As you noticed there is a lot of code moved around, and rebasing
>> produces a lot of conflicts. So I didn't want to spend hours to rebase
>> and rebase without being sure it was the right approach.
>>
>> Now that I got a positive feedback I'll consider rebasing it, hopping
>> that Michael will pick it up.
> 
> I would love to.
> 

Great.

Just sent v3 out.

Christophe