Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2008 13:54:51 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] lib: generic show_mem()
Message-ID: <20080705115451.GC5454@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
References: <20080704160737.750988999@saeurebad.de> <20080704161452.730548249@saeurebad.de> <20080705083445.GA5454@osiris.boeblingen.de.ibm.com> <87hcb44lie.fsf@saeurebad.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87hcb44lie.fsf@saeurebad.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1161
Lines: 27

> > Umh.. I think your 4th patch set was the way to go. This set is not
> > bisectable anymore and those architectures which you didn't convert
> > to the generic implementation won't build anymore. show_mem is present
> > twice there...
> 
> hannes@skyscraper:/tmp/test$ gcc -o prog prog.c lib1.a lib2.a && ./prog
> lib1
> hannes@skyscraper:/tmp/test$ gcc -o prog prog.c lib2.a lib1.a && ./prog
> lib2
> 
> Both lib1 and lib2 define foo() which prog calls.
> 
> I tested this with x86 and it built before and after removal of the
> x86-specific show_mem() (and it did the right thing as the arch code has
> higher priority than lib code).
> 
> But why is it no more bisectable?  You have one point where your kernel
> uses the arch-specific show_mem() and in the next commit, you use the
> generic version.  If something breaks, you can compare the old arch
> version with the generic version.

My fault. It works.
--
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/