On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 12:36:16AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, Nov 02 2020 at 12:53, ira weiny wrote:
Fenghua Yu (2): x86/pks: Enable Protection Keys Supervisor (PKS) x86/pks: Add PKS kernel API
Ira Weiny (7): x86/pkeys: Create pkeys_common.h x86/fpu: Refactor arch_set_user_pkey_access() for PKS support x86/pks: Preserve the PKRS MSR on context switch x86/entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference x86/entry: Preserve PKRS MSR across exceptions x86/fault: Report the PKRS state on fault x86/pks: Add PKS test code
Thomas Gleixner (1): x86/entry: Move nmi entry/exit into common code
So the actual patch ordering is:
x86/pkeys: Create pkeys_common.h x86/fpu: Refactor arch_set_user_pkey_access() for PKS support x86/pks: Enable Protection Keys Supervisor (PKS) x86/pks: Preserve the PKRS MSR on context switch x86/pks: Add PKS kernel API
x86/entry: Move nmi entry/exit into common code x86/entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference
x86/entry: Preserve PKRS MSR across exceptions x86/fault: Report the PKRS state on fault x86/pks: Add PKS test code
This is the wrong ordering, really.
x86/entry: Move nmi entry/exit into common codeis a general cleanup and has absolutely nothing to do with PKRS.So this wants to go first.
Sorry, yes this should be a pre-patch.
Also:
x86/entry: Move nmi entry/exit into common code[from other email]
x86/entry: Pass irqentry_state_t by reference > >is a prerequisite for the rest. So why is it in the middle of the series?
It is in the middle because passing by reference is not needed until additional information is added to irqentry_state_t which is done immediately after this patch by:
x86/entry: Preserve PKRS MSR across exceptions
I debated squashing the 2 but it made review harder IMO. But I thought keeping them in order together made a lot of sense.
And then you enable all that muck _before_ it is usable:
Strictly speaking you are correct, sorry. I will reorder the series.
Bisectability is overrrated, right?
Agreed, bisectability is important. I thought I had it covered but I was wrong.
Once again: Read an understand Documentation/process/*
Aside of that using a spell checker is not optional.
Agreed.
In looking closer at the entry code I've found a couple of other instances I'll add another precursor patch.
I've also found other errors with the series which I should have caught. My apologies I made some last minute changes which I should have checked more thoroughly.
Thanks, Ira