Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 19 Aug 2020 21:44:56 -0400
From:   Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com>,
        Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
        Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@digitalocean.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Vineeth Pillai <viremana@linux.microsoft.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        fweisbec@gmail.com, kerrnel@google.com,
        Phil Auld <pauld@redhat.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/12] Core-sched v6+: kernel protection and hotplug
 fixes
Message-ID: <20200820014456.GD1492280@google.com>
References: <20200815031908.1015049-1-joel@joelfernandes.org>
 <202008191116.1A1F51186D@keescook>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <202008191116.1A1F51186D@keescook>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 11:26:48AM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:18:56PM -0400, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> > This series is continuation of main core-sched v6 series [1] and adds support
> 
> - Is this really "RFC"? Seeing multiple authors implies this is looking
>   to get merged. :)

This mini series was inspired by discussions/concerns mostly by Thomas so
that's why I kept it as RFC since I thought more comments will come.

> - Is this on top of the v6 core-sched series (or instead of)? (That
>   series doesn't seem to be RFC any more either, IMO, if it's at v6.) If
>   this replaces that series, isn't this v7? I don't see the v6
>   core-sched series in -next anywhere?

Yes, it was just a continuation of that. Actually I screwed up, I should have
just posted the whole v6 again with these patches with appropriate
subject-prefix. That would prevent confusion.

> - Whatever the case, please include the series version in the "[PATCH vN ...]"
>   portion of the Subject, otherwise things like "b4" don't really know what's
>   happening.

Got it.

> Sorry for the drive-by comments, but I was really confused trying to
> understand how this fit together. :)

No problem, your comments are very valid so they are welcome :)

thanks,

 - Joel


> -- 
> Kees Cook