On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 12:47 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 2007-03-15 at 17:06 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Well I just see a lot of pain from these patches but I doubt > > they will avoid any bugs. If people don't compile test both > > archs they will always likely break on another. There are lots > > of subtle dependencies that are not expressed in the pathname > > even after this intrusive operation (e.g. in the includes).
[...] > With the proposed patch set, what can break i386 by modifying something > in arch/x86_64, or what can break x86_64 by modifying something in > arch/i386? (not counting the unfinished pci shared code). Oops, sorry, you did say "in the includes". Yeah, that holds the same crap that I'm talking about. $ cat include/asm-i386/stacktrace.h #include <asm-x86_64/stacktrace.h> Which isn't something that I would like to stay either. So it's just something else that needs to be fixed. Not something that will circumvent what the current patch set is trying to do. -- Steve - 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/
