Ok. Thanks for your feedback. I will do it.
* Ren, Qiaowei <qiaowei.ren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-----Original Message-----Ok. I will add related content into this documentation.
From: Ingo Molnar [mailto:mingo.kernel.org@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ingo
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 7:53 PM
To: Ren, Qiaowei
Cc: H. Peter Anvin; Thomas Gleixner; Ingo Molnar; x86@xxxxxxxxxx;
linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Peter Zijlstra
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Intel MPX support
* Qiaowei Ren <qiaowei.ren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Changes since v1:++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
* check to see if #BR occurred in userspace or kernel space.
* use generic structure and macro as much as possible when
decode mpx instructions.
Qiaowei Ren (4):
x86, mpx: add documentation on Intel MPX
x86, mpx: hook #BR exception handler to allocate bound tables
x86, mpx: add prctl commands PR_MPX_INIT, PR_MPX_RELEASE
x86, mpx: extend siginfo structure to include bound violation
Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt | 76 +++++++
arch/x86/Kconfig | 4 +
arch/x86/include/asm/mpx.h | 63 ++++++
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 16 ++
arch/x86/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
arch/x86/kernel/mpx.c | 417
arch/x86/kernel/traps.c | 61 +++++-
include/uapi/asm-generic/siginfo.h | 9 +-
include/uapi/linux/prctl.h | 6 +
kernel/signal.c | 4 +
kernel/sys.c | 12 +
11 files changed, 667 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode
100644 Documentation/x86/intel_mpx.txt create mode 100644
arch/x86/include/asm/mpx.h create mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/mpx.c
Such a patch submission is absolutely inadequate!
- a short summary of what the feature does
- a short description of what hardware supports it today or will
support it in the future
- a short description of whether the feature needs any
configuration from the user or it's entirely auto-enabled on
hardware that supports it.
- a cost/benefit description to unrelated code: is this slowing down
- how does user-space compiler support stand, what's the expected
status there, etc.
Only a small fraction of that information can be found in
I'm absolutely sick of these semi-anonymous patch submissions from Intel, so
I'm NAK-ing it until it's communicated properly.
More importantly, put it into the 0/X mail! That's how people can
review such a patch set effectively.