From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] avoid ifdefs in desc.h, getting rid of pack_ldt and pack_tss Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:40:55 -0800 Message-ID: <4761A6E7.7030602@zytor.com> References: <11975561713425-git-send-email-gcosta@redhat.com> <20071213202800.GD25130@elte.hu> <20071213205838.GA9649@elte.hu> <20071213212221.GA16747@elte.hu> <4761A385.1080301@zytor.com> <20071213213517.GA25563@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20071213213517.GA25563@elte.hu> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: ehabkost@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Glauber de Oliveira Costa , chrisw@sous-sol.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws, akpm@linux-foundation.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, roland@redhat.com, ak@suse.de List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Ingo Molnar wrote: >> Well, "no functional changes" is not quite the same thing as "no >> object code changes". > > yeah, true, but the safest way to ensure no functional changes is to get > identical object code. In sched-devel.git i include obj comparisons to > cleanup patches as a self-assurance (and later bughunt helper) to make > sure a cleanup is really just a cleanup. Of course. "No object code changes" is a stronger statement, however, not all types of cleanups result in that. It's highly useful when applied appropriately, though. In particular, the programmer should know when object code changes are expected. -hpa