From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754192AbYGZNJA (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:09:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751830AbYGZNIw (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:08:52 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:55800 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751818AbYGZNIv (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:08:51 -0400 Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:08:40 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Vegard Nossum Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, the arch/x86 maintainers , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: more header fixes Message-ID: <20080726130840.GA14466@elte.hu> References: <20080716142225.GA19054@elte.hu> <20080722123231.GA13172@localhost.localdomain> <20080722103632.GA27029@elte.hu> <19f34abd0807220413sabb9f65h6ac20f98efb680bf@mail.gmail.com> <20080722113823.GA9351@elte.hu> <19f34abd0807221127q1c26fed7w5b276cadb7319fec@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <19f34abd0807221127q1c26fed7w5b276cadb7319fec@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Vegard Nossum wrote: > 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. pulled into tip/x86/header-guards, thanks Vegard. One small request: in the future, could you use git-request-pull to generate pull requests? That way the full URI is included (otherwise it's easy to forget to add the 'for-tip' branch to the pull i do, etc.). Something like: git-request-pull linus/master \ git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vegard/linux-2.6-headers.git \ for-tip should do the trick. Thanks, Ingo