lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date


esr@thyrsus.com said:
> Not good enough. In a year, the pile of false positives would get
> high enough to make it too hard to spot real bugs like the Aironet
> mismatch. The whole point of the cleanup is to be able to mechanize
> the consistency checks so they require a minimum of human judgment.

I'm not sure that's the case. The nature of the false positives is that
they're generally _temporary_ aberrations, caused by the loss of
synchronisation of various maintainers w.r.t submitting patches to Linus.

I'd be very surprised if the number of false positives isn't fairly stable,
with new ones being introduced at a similar rate to the rate at which old
ones finally become correct.

Might be interesting to check a few older kernels to see if this is true.
Actually I might expect it to be roughly proportional to the number of
separately-maintained bodies of code - so it'll grow over time, as the size
of the Linux kernel grows.

--
dwmw2


-
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: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.226 / U:34.384 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site