From: Rogan Dawes <rogan@dawes.za.net>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] [NEXT] arm926ejs: reduce code size with -msingle-pic-base
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 18:45:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C9CD5A0.6060207@dawes.za.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C9C3B71.9090709@free.fr>
On 2010/09/24 7:47 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> On a side note, I do not know of a clear general definition of
> 'bisectability', which means I could break it yet again unkonwingly. Can
> you (or anyone, actually :) ) point me to a, or even the, standard
> definition of 'bisectable' and, if that has a specific meaning, of
> 'fully bisectable'?
Not sure if there is an agreed definition, but the main idea behind
bisection stems from the "git bisect" tool, which allows you to mark one
commit as "known good", and another as "known bad", and then calculates
a commit in the middle to be tested for "goodness" or "badness". As
commits are marked "good" or "bad", the tool halves (bisects) the range
of commits until the single commit that introduced the breakage can be
identified.
Of course, for the bisection process to be able to work, all points
along the path must a) compile and b) be able to be tested for the breakage.
So, a fully bisectable patch series would maintain the above properties,
for all boards.
This is one of the reasons that Linus likes to have code used as it is
introduced, rather than building up a whole lot of unused
infrastructure, only to activate it with a final commit. The bisection
would then point to the final commit as the culprit, when the true
failure may have been introduced by one of the preceding commits.
That's "as I understand it", of course.
Rogan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-24 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-22 13:57 [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] [NEXT] arm: change relocation flag from -fPIC to -fPIE Albert Aribaud
2010-09-22 13:57 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 2/2] [NEXT] arm926ejs: reduce code size with -msingle-pic-base Albert Aribaud
2010-09-22 18:05 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-22 19:07 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-22 20:51 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-22 21:36 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-22 22:07 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-23 14:44 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-23 15:13 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-23 15:35 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-23 16:53 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-23 16:37 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-23 17:04 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-23 21:13 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-23 21:30 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-24 13:38 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-24 16:08 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-22 20:30 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-09-22 20:55 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-22 21:11 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-09-22 21:33 ` Ben Gardiner
2010-09-23 7:12 ` Heiko Schocher
2010-09-23 8:05 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-23 10:08 ` Heiko Schocher
2010-09-23 12:45 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-24 5:11 ` Heiko Schocher
2010-09-24 5:47 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-24 16:45 ` Rogan Dawes [this message]
2010-09-24 16:58 ` Rogan Dawes
2010-09-24 17:13 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2010-09-22 18:05 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] [NEXT] arm: change relocation flag from -fPIC to -fPIE Ben Gardiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4C9CD5A0.6060207@dawes.za.net \
--to=rogan@dawes.za.net \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox