On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 02:36:03PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote: > So, I can think of several ways to fix this (or better: make this > robust). However given that I will be away the next two weeks this is > not going to happen for the upcoming merge window. I really don't want > to rush this, since this has potential for severe subtle bugs... like > we had them already several times with our address space and dynamic > page table upgrade handling in the past (and like I nearly introduced > at least one bug with this patch). > > Therefore the first three patches of this series are scheduled for the > upcoming merge window, while the final set_fs() removal should come > one merge later. Did you manage to get back to the s390 set_fs removal?
