![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On 5/28/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote: > On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 09:33:32PM +0530, Nitin Gupta wrote: > > On 5/28/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote: <snip> > > I have not seen any explanations: > - Why did the upstream author write the code that way? > - Why are your changes correct? > - Why do your changes allow the compiler to produce faster code? > > The upstream author of the code is available - and he might be able to > help you getting answers. No matter whether your changes are incorrect > or correct optimizations that should go upstream, in both cases > discussing these issues with upstream is the best solution. The changelog I posted along with patch mentions all the changes I made. I thought we will find all problems with this changelog in hand and considering that its just ~500 LOC. But still, ok, asking author himself will be good if he replies. I will mail him detailed changelog and seek his feedback on this. This should answer all of your questions. > > And testing is nice, but if you broke some case that's outside of your > tests you'll never notice. > Yes. We cannot come up with exhaustive set of test cases to cover all cases. But assuming that _original_ version is right and taking the chagelog we should be able to verify if the porting is correct. - Nitin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-05-29 05:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||