Re: [PATCH] x86: more header fixes

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> >> I've updated my script to also fix any rogue uses of header-guard
> >> names in auxiliary files. I'm attaching the resulting patch.
> >>
> >> It doesn't really _fix_ the hideous hack, it merely unbreaks it.
> >>
> >> Patch #2 also fixes some left-over headers. They both apply on top of
> >> tip/x86/header-guards.
> >
> > looks good - do you have a branch i could pull into
> > tip/x86/header-guards?
> 
> I've pushed it to the 'for-tip' branch of
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vegard/linux-2.6-headers.git
> 
> (Note that since you rebased the same branch last time, I just applied 
> my patches on top of _your_ branch and pushed that to above location.)
> 
> Though I still believe it should be squashed for bisectability.

hm, i pulled it but 1ab9e368 cannot be squashed into aa27f9586 cleanly.

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?

	Ingo