[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200706180153.10698.vapier@gentoo.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:53:10 -0400
From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] make hdrscheck.sh force __asm__ in exported headers
On Monday 18 June 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:17:46 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org> wrote:
> > On Monday 18 June 2007, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On 17 Jun 2007 18:54:24 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org> wrote:
> > > > This updates scripts/hdrschecks.sh by grepping for asm() constructs
> > > > and rejecting them in favor of __asm__() in exported headers.
> > >
> > > And does the kernel pass these checks?
> >
> > nope ... should i audit the arches before this gets merged ?
>
> Yes please. I'd rather not break things in this fashion: it causes a storm
> of emails which I need to redirect to the appropriate maintainers who then
> take an arbitrarily long time to do anything. Meanwhile lots of testers
> get impacted and this reduces the testing level of all the other thousands
> of patches in there.
makes sense, i'll post some stuff
> Also, your changelog sucks:
>
> This updates scripts/hdrschecks.sh by grepping for asm() constructs and
> rejecting them in favor of __asm__() in exported headers.
>
> well OK. But for what reason? We can see a lot of pain in this patch but
> no gain. The changelog should tell us what the benefit is, so we can make
> informed tradeoff decisions.
sorry, i blame GNU changelog style ;)
-mike
Download attachment "signature.asc " of type "application/pgp-signature" (828 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists