Re: [GIT PULL] kmemcheck fixes for -tip

[Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>]

2009/5/27 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>:
[...]

> Pulled, thanks Vegard! There were a few conflicts with tip:master,
> due to ongoing work in other areas:
>
>    Merge branch 'kmemcheck'
>
>    Conflicts:
>        include/linux/ring_buffer.h
>        init/do_mounts.c
>        kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
>
> I resolved them manually, you might want to double check them.

Thanks. There seems to have been one interaction with this old commit
from who knows what branch:

commit 899b5030558b8dc21a171e2e8129e0a93fb08860
Author: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Date:   Tue Apr 29 16:31:50 2008 +0200

    init: root mount fix

    Needs changelog

    Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
    Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

I think this commit can get chucked now, as I provided what I believe
was the better workaround (to introduce a wrapper for getname() that
takes GFP flags: commits 30066967f86f8b31fb7aef1f0a2214ae8d5a4b80 and
1c4018089bc978fa1ec3fc69d220ba432b1f075b). But the code as it stands
will work as it should.

There's now also an indentation mismatch in
include/linux/ring_buffer.h, line 16, in struct ring_buffer_event.

Don't know how you'd prefer to solve these, if at all? Should I send
patches against tip/master?


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