On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, Mark Rutland wrote: > > > > > So what's the status now? Besides debatable minor style > > > > > issues there were no more objections to v8. Would this > > > > > go through the ARM repo or via the ftrace repo? > > > > > > > > Sorry agains for the delay on this. I'm now back in the office and in > > > > front of a computer daily, so I can spend a bit more time on this. > > > > > > > > Regardless of anything else, I think that we should queue the first > > > > three patches now. I've poked the relevant maintainers for their acks so > > > > that those can be taken via the arm64 tree. > > > > > > > > I'm happy to do the trivial cleanups on the last couple of patches (e.g. > > > > s/lr/x30), and I'm actively looking at the API rework I requested. > > > > > > Ok, I've picked up patches 1-3 and I'll wait for you to spin updates to the > > > last two. > > > > Ok, I see that patches 1-3 are picked up and are already present in recent > > kernels. > > > > Is there any progress on remaining two patches? > > I'm afraid that I've been distracted on other fronts, so I haven't made > progress there. > > > Any help required? > > If you'd be happy to look at the cleanup I previously suggested for the > core, that would be great. When I last looked, it was simple to rework > things so that arch code doesn't have to define MCOUNT_ADDR, but I > hadn't figured out exactly how to split the core mcount assumptions from > the important state machine bits. > > I'll take another look and see if I can provide more detail. :) Hi Mark, has any progress been made on any front? Feels like this got stuck a bit. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs
