Re: [PING] [PATCH 1/5] S390: Add new hwcap values for new cpu architecture - arch12.

[Stefan Liebler <stli at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>]

On 06/27/2017 02:49 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 06/27/2017 08:12 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > On 06/27/2017 02:06 PM, Stefan Liebler wrote:
> > > On 06/21/2017 08:51 AM, Stefan Liebler wrote:
> > > > The new hwcap values indicate support for:
> > > > - Vector packed decimal facility
> > > > - Vector enhancements facility 1
> > > > - Guarded storage facility
> > > >
> > > > Note: arch12 is NOT the official name of the new CPU.
> > > > It refers to the edition number of the Principle of Operations manual.
> > > >
> > > > ChangeLog:
> > > >
> > > >      * sysdeps/s390/dl-procinfo.c (_dl_s390_cap_flags):
> > > >      Add vxd, vxe, gs flag.
> > > >      * sysdeps/s390/dl-procinfo.h: Add HWCAP_S390_VXD, HWCAP_S390_VXE,
> > > >      HWCAP_S390_GS capability.
> > > >      * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/bits/hwcap.h
> > > >      (HWCAP_S390_VXD, HWCAP_S390_VXE, HWCAP_S390_GS): Define.
> > > > ---
> > > >    sysdeps/s390/dl-procinfo.c                | 5 +++--
> > > >    sysdeps/s390/dl-procinfo.h                | 5 ++++-
> > > >    sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/s390/bits/hwcap.h | 3 +++
> > > >    3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > PING
> >
> > FWIW, I think you can assume consensus for such s390-specific changes,
> > especially if they do not alter ABI (so that we can revert them if
> > necessary, without recompiling applications).
> >
> > “In general this maintainership means that you have the discretion to
> > assume consensus for a change of your own without waiting for review or
> > comments on consensus.”
> >
> > <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/MAINTAINERS>
>
> Agreed. Unless you are looking for additional review, as a machine maintainer
> you have assumed consensus and are responsible for your changes :-)
Okay. Then I've committed it.

Thanks.
Stefan