Messages in this thread |  | | | Subject | Re: Light-weight dynamically extended stacks | | From | Valdis.Kletnieks@vt ... | | Date | Wed, 21 Dec 2005 00:57:45 -0500 |
On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:40:06 EST, Patrick McLean said:
> Matt Mackall wrote:
> >
> > This is not intended to be an automatic scheme. To use it, you must
> > actually insert code into the troublesome codepaths, which will of
> > course serve as a red flag for code review.
> >
>
> It might be an idea to put in a #warn to make it an even bigger red
> flag, and to really make people fix this rather than just ignore it
> since it works with the dynamic stacks.
Stick a 'depends on CONFIG_BROKEN' on it? ;)
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] |  |