From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754015AbYGVS1W (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:27:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751869AbYGVS1O (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:27:14 -0400 Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.46.30]:35628 "EHLO yw-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750961AbYGVS1N (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:27:13 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=Zfjpt+X55zWBtAVo9qYCKBrVC8/7K+U/cUWzew/T7QB1Le9dVSH5nUu32nBt+9kRTa kQs1Oqp5GwC1b6aew1HNUGp/3iUoB9vuRJVx0tGpYYkoRHkF+zxRtBEl0tPCjBql0roW FobAwHOj7MRiYWc5zmj8df/nUk9mCIElz+VXM= Message-ID: <19f34abd0807221127q1c26fed7w5b276cadb7319fec@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 20:27:11 +0200 From: "Vegard Nossum" To: "Ingo Molnar" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: more header fixes Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "the arch/x86 maintainers" , "Peter Zijlstra" In-Reply-To: <20080722113823.GA9351@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080716142225.GA19054@elte.hu> <20080722123231.GA13172@localhost.localdomain> <20080722103632.GA27029@elte.hu> <19f34abd0807220413sabb9f65h6ac20f98efb680bf@mail.gmail.com> <20080722113823.GA9351@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: >> Though I still believe it should be squashed for bisectability. > > hm, i pulled it but 1ab9e368 cannot be squashed into aa27f9586 cleanly. Yes, you are right. I forgot to check. > I'd suggest the following approach, which we used for the scripted > unification of arch/x86. Do a couple of preparatory patches that just > bring all the header guards into proper shape. _Then_ run the script > against that "prepared" tree. The end result should be correct to the > best of our current knowledge. (i'll figure out any remaining build > breakages quickly - i can build 120+ random kernels per hour) > > We can rebase x86/header-guards to such a bisectable approach no problem > if you can do it like that, it's not yet merged anywhere. Just send me a > pull URI that i'll pull into a x86/header-guards that is reset back to > linus/master. > > Can you see any complications with that approach? There's not really that much to prepare. But it really helps to work against the right tree to begin with :-) So here's another one, this time prepared against linus/master, and fully bisectable by delaying the fixing of the headers which have external users of their guard-names. Check out the (new) 'for-tip' branch of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vegard/linux-2.6-headers.git There are still headers left which have no guard at all; that's okay. If they should be changed, it can be done later, it shouldn't make a difference for now. Thanks :-) Vegard -- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036