Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:39:03 +0200 | From | "Vegard Nossum" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] kmemcheck: divide and conquer |
| |
On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote: > > * Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com> wrote: >> The RFC part: Is this a good thing to do? I personally hate the >> 4000-line files that are so commonly found in the kernel, and >> therefore prefer this split-up. On the other hand, C lacks namespaces, >> which sometimes leads to some really long and ugly names just to >> prevent clashes in the future. But it's your call, I'll just do >> whatever it takes to get in... ;-) > > it's a very nice splitup! :-) [ Any Git coordinates to pick it up? ]
Ah, thanks, that's just what I wanted to hear! :-D
This particular commit can be found in the "against-v2.6.26-rc4" branch of kmemcheck.git:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/vegard/kmemcheck.git;a=commit;h=8c67b9b8005a518ce003943a64c37a9fc2c84485
But for the newer versions, I've merged it into the "kmemcheck core" commit. To pick up the whole series, you can either check out the against-v2.6.26-rc5 branch (which is frozen), or you can check out the "current" branch which is the most recent rebase (against v2.6.26-rc6, but not yet frozen):
$ git remote add kmemcheck git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vegard/kmemcheck.git $ git fetch kmemcheck $ git checkout kmemcheck/current
Just a small disclaimer: It's not VERY well tested, so build breakage may occur with this shuffle. It really shouldn't, though.
Vegard
-- "The animistic metaphor of the bug that maliciously sneaked in while the programmer was not looking is intellectually dishonest as it disguises that the error is the programmer's own creation." -- E. W. Dijkstra, EWD1036
| |