On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 10:42:02AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Code is either correct, and comes with an explanation as to how it is > correct, or it doesn't go in. Saying that something is like BPF is > not an explanation as to how it's correct. Saying that someone has > not come up with the chain of events that causes a mere violation of > architecture rules to actual incorrect execution is not an explanation > as to how something is correct. No, I'm saying your concerns are baseless and too vague to address. > text_poke() by itself is *not* the proper API, as discussed. It > doesn't serialize adequately, even on x86. We have text_poke_sync() > for that. Andy, I replied explaining the difference between text_poke() and text_poke_sync(). It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about, so I'm not going to be wasting my time on further communications with you.
