[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4761A6E7.7030602@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:40:55 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
glommer@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, ehabkost@...hat.com,
jeremy@...p.org, avi@...ranet.com, anthony@...emonkey.ws,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
ak@...e.de, chrisw@...s-sol.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
zach@...are.com, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] avoid ifdefs in desc.h, getting rid of pack_ldt and pack_tss
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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists