Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760812AbYGAXoc (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 19:44:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751334AbYGAXoY (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 19:44:24 -0400 Received: from theia.rz.uni-saarland.de ([134.96.7.31]:28629 "EHLO theia.rz.uni-saarland.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752765AbYGAXoX (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jul 2008 19:44:23 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 01:42:10 +0200 From: Alexander van Heukelum To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Simple changes to make traps_32.c and traps_64.c more similar Message-ID: <20080701234210.GA29962@mailshack.com> References: <20080701193643.GA29695@mailshack.com> <20080701195004.GA27557@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080701195004.GA27557@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (theia.rz.uni-saarland.de [134.96.7.31]); Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:44:00 +0200 (CEST) X-AntiVirus: checked by AntiVir MailGate (version: 2.1.2-14; AVE: 7.8.0.59; VDF: 7.0.5.30; host: AntiVir1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1378 Lines: 35 On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 09:50:04PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > nice. In terms of functionality, it is supposed to be a pure > no-changes-intended commit, correct? > > In that case it makes sense to split it in two: in the first (larger) > bit put the things that are provably invariant on the .o and can be > verified that way. > > In the second one, put the things that change the .o output slightly > (variable reordering can do that) - this we have to check more closely. > > (One can normally do such a splitup by editing the raw diff and > splitting it in half that way - by sorting each chunk into the > appropriate target patch - and then making sure the end result is still > the same.) Hi, I ended up redoing it. The first patch has no influence on the generated code; the second one does not change code size and the others are more or less single logical changes. I sent the patches as a reply to the original patch (replying to this one would have been more logical... I need some sleep now). I tested compilation and using qemu after patch 1, 2, and 7. They all run fine. Greetings, Alexander > Ingo -- 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/