7/6/2023 5:35 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
On 04/07/2023 14:33, Konstantin Meskhidze (A) wrote:
7/3/2023 8:09 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
On 03/07/2023 14:50, Konstantin Meskhidze (A) wrote:
6/22/2023 1:18 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
On 22/06/2023 10:00, Konstantin Meskhidze (A) wrote:
6/19/2023 9:19 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
On 19/06/2023 16:24, Konstantin Meskhidze (A) wrote:
6/13/2023 11:38 PM, Mickaël Salaün пишет:
On 13/06/2023 12:54, Konstantin Meskhidze (A) wrote:
6/6/2023 6:17 PM, Günther Noack пишет:
[...]
Thanks for a tip. I think it's a better solution here. Now this
commit is in Mickaёl's -next branch. I could send a one-commit patch later.
Mickaёl, what do you think?
I removed this series from -next because there is some issues (see the
bot's emails), but anyway, this doesn't mean these patches don't need to
be changed, they do. The goal of -next is to test more widely a patch
series and get more feedbacks, especially from bots. When this series
will be fully ready (and fuzzed with syzkaller), I'll push it to Linus
Torvalds.
I'll review the remaining tests and sample code this week, but you can
still take into account the documentation review.
Hi, Mickaёl.
I have a few quetions?
- Are you going to fix warnings for bots, meanwhile I run syzcaller?
No, you need to fix that with the next series (except the Signed-off-by
warnings).
Hi, Mickaёl.
As I understand its possible to check bots warnings just after you
push the next V12 series again into your -next branch???
Yes, we get bot warnings on the -next tree, but the command that
generate it should be reproducible.
Stephen Rothwell sent a few warnings he got with powerpc
pseries_le_defconfig. Do I need to fix it in V12 patch? How can I handle
it cause no warnings in current .config?
Yes, this need to be fixed in the next series. Could you point to the
message?
Here you are please:
1.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20230607141044.1df56246@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
This issue is because the WARN_ON_ONCE() is triggered by any
non-landlocked process, so removing the WARN_ON_ONCE() will fix that.
Got it. Will be fixed. Thanks.
2.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20230607135229.1f1e5c91@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Wrong printf format.
Ok. I will fix it.
3.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-next/20230607124940.44af88bb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
It looks like htmldocs doesn't like #if in enum definition. Anyway, I
think it should be better to not conditionally define an enum. I've
pushed this change here: https://git.kernel.org/mic/c/8c96c7eee3ff
(landlock-net-v11 branch)
Ok. Thank you.
I'm almost done with the test, I revamped code and I'll send that tomorrow.
Ok.Thanks you. Please take your time. I will wait.
[...]
.
