On 09/30/2012 08:22 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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.
>
Ah, well thank you all for the guidance!
Daniel
--
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
