[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081227102038.GC14639@elte.hu>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:20:38 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...radead.org>,
x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, randy.dunlap@...cle.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: Eliminate atleast 10684 sparse warnings
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008 15:21:36 +0530 Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ILLEGAL_POINTER_VALUE
> > -# define POISON_POINTER_DELTA CONFIG_ILLEGAL_POINTER_VALUE
> > +# define POISON_POINTER_DELTA _AC(CONFIG_ILLEGAL_POINTER_VALUE, UL)
> > #else
> > # define POISON_POINTER_DELTA 0
> > #endif
>
> So now
>
> commit 948f984df52511bb0efa5c026813b0c34de43aa0
> Author: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
> AuthorDate: Tue May 20 14:39:25 2008 +0300
> Commit: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> CommitDate: Tue May 20 13:42:31 2008 +0200
>
> core, x86: make LIST_POISON less deadly
>
> gets splattered across three commits (at least). Sigh.
Can rebase, although that would hide the (deserved) credit that
Jaswinder's patch deserves. And it does not appear to be a must-rebase
example to me - it's not like one does sparse builds during bisection.
> (how come that patch is 7 moonths old and still unmerged, btw?)
Linus had reservations about the first version (which got fixed but which
prevented it from going upstream in the first cycle) - and it's not an
exactly critical change and other stuff interfered. All our previous merge
windows were fully filled ;)
Ingo
--
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