Kyle Moffett wrote:
On May 2, 2006, at 11:19:35, Avi Kivity wrote:
I wasn't talking about modifying gcc to do the checking, rather using
language features so that the checks would happen during a regular
compile. That would mean we weren't dependent on somebody running
sparse with a configuration that triggers the bug, but those few who
compile the code before submitting the patch would get it
automatically checked.
There's a reason that we tell all patch submitters to run "make C=1"
on several configs before submitting patches. Besides, you seem to
have a vast misunderstanding of LK development processes; we frown
heavily on people who don't "compile their code before submitting the
patch", it's not a rare thing at all.
That was tongue in cheek. Perhaps I should have added a smiley.
I follow lkml quite closely, even though I lack the time to contribute
in the areas that interest me.
--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
-
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]