Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables.

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>
Date: Saturday, February 9, 2008 - 6:37 am

* Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:


i think the worst is over already and i'm reasonably sure that there are 
no more bugs in it - this _is_ a 1:1 patch after all, so in theory the 
worst side-effect should be build breakages due to include file 
spaghetti. The window for this particular breakage was just 256 commits, 
that's OK i think.

If you want less stress next time around you might want to consider 
pushing such patches via individual architectures, so that it can all be 
shaken out (and such build bugs are found quickly) and pushed via the 
architecture trees. (Even such a patch that changes the number of 
cross-arch function arguments and introduces a new type can be 
architectured in a way to make it per arch.)

	Ingo
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Feb 8, 7:04 pm)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Ingo Molnar, (Fri Feb 8, 7:15 pm)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Martin Schwidefsky, (Sat Feb 9, 6:06 am)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Ingo Molnar, (Sat Feb 9, 6:37 am)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Martin Schwidefsky, (Sat Feb 9, 6:56 am)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Mike Frysinger, (Sat Feb 9, 1:56 pm)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Martin Schwidefsky, (Sun Feb 10, 5:17 am)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Mike Frysinger, (Sun Feb 10, 5:25 am)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Martin Schwidefsky, (Sun Feb 10, 5:41 am)
Re: CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables., Mike Frysinger, (Sun Feb 10, 6:06 am)