On Thu, Jan 9, 2025 at 12:54 PM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2025-01-09 10:38:03 [-0800], Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > lgtm. > > Should we take into bpf-next or the whole set is handled together > > somewhere? > > If you don't mind, I would hope to route the whole series via the > modules tree. Some of the lower functions (__module_address()) check for > disabled preemption and will trigger warnings at runtime if this gets > applied before (earlier in the series) the check gets replaced. I see. Then Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
