On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 09:04:35PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 17:23 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 06:20:07PM -0500, Daniel Santos wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Santos <daniel.santos@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > include/linux/bug.h | 2 +-
> > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/bug.h b/include/linux/bug.h
> > > index aaac4bb..298a916 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/bug.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/bug.h
> > > @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ extern int __build_bug_on_failed;
> > > #define BUILD_BUG() \
> > > do { \
> > > extern void __build_bug_failed(void) \
> > > - __linktime_error("BUILD_BUG failed"); \
> > > + __compiletime_error("BUILD_BUG failed");\
> > > __build_bug_failed(); \
> > > } while (0)
> >
> > This change should either occur as part of patch 5 or before patch 5,
> > not after.
>
> I noticed the same thing and was about to comment on it.
>
> Please do not break bisectablity. All your patches should compile and
> run at every step.
And while we're at it, every patch upstream should have a commit message
explaining why this is done. No matter how trivial it is, because after
a sufficient amount of time passes, everyone tends to forget why this
has been done.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
