Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932186AbaJNMLz (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:11:55 -0400 Received: from admin.comprocs.com ([12.186.155.30]:64950 "HELO mx2.compro.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754977AbaJNMLy (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:11:54 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 628 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:11:54 EDT X-BYPSHEADER: 3184645 X-SMScore: -200 Message-ID: <543D1097.7010709@compro.net> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 08:01:27 -0400 From: Mark Hounschell Reply-To: markh@compro.net Organization: Compro Computer Svcs. User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg KH , Joe Perches CC: devel , Lidza Louina , DaeSeok Youn , driverdev-devel@linuxdriverproject.org, linux-kernel , Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: dgap: re-arrange functions for removing forward declarations. References: <20141013023425.GA15452@devel> <20141013032544.GA26646@kroah.com> <1413212198.1287.9.camel@joe-AO725> <1441864556.1190074.1413252337243.JavaMail.root@mx2.compro.net> In-Reply-To: <1441864556.1190074.1413252337243.JavaMail.root@mx2.compro.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/13/2014 10:04 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 07:56:38AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: >> On Mon, 2014-10-13 at 17:01 +0900, DaeSeok Youn wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> 2014-10-13 12:25 GMT+09:00 Greg KH : >>>> On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 11:34:25AM +0900, Daeseok Youn wrote: >>>>> Re-arrange the functions for removing forward declarations. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Daeseok Youn >>>>> --- >>>>> This patch has too many changes for re-arranging the functions. >>>>> So I wonder that I should break this up into smaller patches. >>>> >>>> Are the .o files identical before and after this patch? If so, it's >>>> fine. >>> Ok. I will check for that. >> >> The .o files shouldn't be identical after function reordering. > > Hm, they might be the same size, but I can see how on some > architectures (like ppc) how that would not be the case, you are right. > > Isn't there an "objdiff" program or something like that which might help > in validating that nothing "changed" in the source for type of patch > that just moves functions around in a file. > > thanks, > Greg, Would just testing the thing be of any help? Regards Mark -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/