From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7625B6F06 for ; Wed, 6 Apr 2011 04:17:11 +1000 (EST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/34] Make kernel build deterministic From: James Bottomley To: Greg KH In-Reply-To: <20110405154918.GA31337@suse.de> References: <1302015561-21047-1-git-send-email-mmarek@suse.cz> <20110405154918.GA31337@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2011 11:16:52 -0700 Message-ID: <1302027412.2924.7.camel@mulgrave.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: anil_ravindranath@pmc-sierra.com, mchehab@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, mac@melware.de, aacraid@adaptec.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, allan.stephens@windriver.com, hpa@zytor.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, t.sailer@alumni.ethz.ch, gwingerde@gmail.com, IvDoorn@gmail.com, elf@buici.com, cluster-devel@redhat.com, ccaulfie@redhat.com, mingo@redhat.com, dougthompson@xmission.com, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, jon.maloy@ericsson.com, arnaud.giersch@free.fr, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, teigland@redhat.com, tony.olech@elandigitalsystems.com, apw@canonical.com, linux-hams@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, swhiteho@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Michal Marek , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bluesmoke-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, chuanxiao.dong@intel.com, paulus@samba.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, davem@davemloft.net List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2011-04-05 at 08:49 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 04:58:47PM +0200, Michal Marek wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > this series makes it possible to build bit-identical kernel image and > > modules from identical sources. Of course the build is already > > deterministic in terms of behavior of the code, but the various > > timestamps embedded in the object files make it hard to compare two > > builds, for instance to verify that a makefile cleanup didn't > > accidentally change something. A prime example is /proc/config.gz, which > > has both a timestamp in the gzip header and a timestamp in the payload > > data. With this series applied, a script like this will produce > > identical kernels each time: > > Very nice stuff. Do you want to take the individual patches through one > of your trees, or do you mind if the subsystem maintainers take them > through theirs? I'm happy for this to go through a single tree. James