lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] kmemcheck: divide and conquer
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> * Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Right now, I am reluctant to apply your fix because it means that
>> kmemcheck tree won't build as it is. In general, what's the way to
>> resolve these things? Do you have another branch, *-fixes, where these
>> fixlets can go until either of the conflicting changesets are merged
>> upstream? If so, it seems that that would be the right place for this
>> patch. Do you agree or do you have another solution? :-)
>
> yes, i solved it the following "Git way": i did a --no-commit merge of
> the tip/x86/irq tree into the tip/kmemcheck2 branch and then
> "git-cherry-pick --no-commit"-ed the fix and thus made it a part of that
> merge commit. This way the build failure is never visible during
> bisection either.

Aha. This means that I don't need to do anything but ack your fix.
Sounds good to me, thanks!

(I guess I will still need to check out -tip to find the source of the
memset redefinition warning.)


Vegard

--
"The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while
the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it
disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation."
-- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-16 09:23    [W:0.086 / U:0.492 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site