[Cyrill Gorcunov - Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:42:57PM +0400]
...
| |
| | - in this case your first change was the obvious one and your NULL fix
| | and your cleanup to the parameter expose a fundamental weakness of
| | early_param conversions - and i think highlighting that as separate
| | commits might give someone ideas to improve the early_param()
| | facility, if they see the fix patterns.
|
| Ingo - I think the problem with early_param is not NULL itself but
| rather - what is the right way to deal with boot params? I mean we
| could pass empty string (not NULL) in case of argument absence _but_ would it
| be the right way? If you remember when I sent first series for early_param
| checking (and actually there are number of same issue exists for example
| in s390 arch) - I was asking community what is the best way - since I'm not
| that strong in interface engineering - i prefer fix the bugs :)
|
| |
| | - Also, the NULL condition is obscure, so there's no bisection breakage
| | risk and it's the easiest for me to do append-only patches. The effort
| | and thought process you and Cyrill have put into it deserve a separate
| | commit as well anyway - and others might learn from it when looking at
| | logs.
| |
| | Ingo
| |
| - Cyrill -
here is the link to that message
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/9/222
- Cyrill -
--
