> > There are a number of compile-time checks that your patch has removed
> > which catch such things, and as such your patch is not acceptable.
> > Some architectures have a lower threshold of acceptability for the
> > maximum udelay value, so it's absolutely necessary to keep this.
>
> It removes that check from x86 - other architectures retain it.
>
> I don't recall seeing anyone trigger the check,
I do ;) Esp in vendor out of tree crap. It's a good compile time
diagnostic so the junk code doesnt' hit mainline but gets fixed first.
>
> and it hardly seems worth
> adding a "few kb" to vmlinux for it?
but it can be fixed to not add that few kb while retaining the checking
value. All that needs is for it to be a define that calls the worker
function. Eg the check gets optimized out and all that remains is the
call to the worker function that does the actual delay.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
