fix checkstack.pl arch detection
PATCH 1/1 fix checkstack.pl arch detection
uname -m was leaving a newline in $arch, and not passing the tests.
Also, printing the unknown arch on failure is probably helpful.
---
scripts/checkstack.pl +2 -1
@@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ my (@stack, $re, $x, $xs); my $arch = shift; if ($arch eq "") { $arch = `uname -m`; + chomp($arch); } $x = "[0-9a-f]"; # hex character
@@ -85,7 +86,7 @@ my (@stack, $re, $x, $xs); # 0: 00 e8 38 01 LINK 0x4e0; $re = qr/.*[[:space:]]LINK[[:space:]]*(0x$x{1,8})/o; } else { - print("wrong or unknown architecture\n"); + print("wrong or unknown architecture \"$arch\"\n"); exit } }
Quoted 6 lines · Eric Sandeen
uname -m was leaving a newline in $arch, and not passing the tests.
Also, printing the unknown arch on failure is probably helpful.
Signed-off-by Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>
Jörn
Signature · 2 lines
Premature optimization is the root of all evil. -- Donald Knuth
Quoted 9 lines · On Sat, 3 May 2008 00:37:03 +0200 J__rn Engel <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 6 lines · Eric Sandeen
uname -m was leaving a newline in $arch, and not passing the tests.
Also, printing the unknown arch on failure is probably helpful.
Signed-off-by Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Joern Engel <[email protected]>
please cc apw on checkpatch changes.
This patch needs some help to merge against the forthcoming checkpatch-0.19. I sent your patches apw-wards.
Quoted 8 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 5 lines · On Sat, 3 May 2008 00:37:03 +0200 J__rn Engel <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 4 lines · Eric Sandeen
uname -m was leaving a newline in $arch, and not passing the tests.
Also, printing the unknown arch on failure is probably helpful.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
Signed-off-by Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Joern Engel <[email protected]>please cc apw on checkpatch changes.
This patch needs some help to merge against the forthcoming checkpatch-0.19. I sent your patches apw-wards.
Um, checkpatch or checkstack? :)
-Eric
Quoted 13 lines · On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:20:48 -0500 Eric Sandeen <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 12 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 8 lines · On Sat, 3 May 2008 00:37:03 +0200 J__rn Engel <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 5 lines · Eric Sandeen
uname -m was leaving a newline in $arch, and not passing the tests.
Also, printing the unknown arch on failure is probably helpful.
Signed-off-by Eric Sandeen <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Joern Engel <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 5 lines
please cc apw on checkpatch changes.
This patch needs some help to merge against the forthcoming checkpatch-0.19. I sent your patches apw-wards.
Um, checkpatch or checkstack? :)
bah.
hm, I wonder why one of them got a reject. `patch -l' was needed. Mailer munchies, perhaps?
Please check that what I applied is still correct.
Quoted 8 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
please cc apw on checkpatch changes.
This patch needs some help to merge against the forthcoming checkpatch-0.19. I sent your patches apw-wards.
Um, checkpatch or checkstack? :)
Quoted 6 lines
bah.
hm, I wonder why one of them got a reject. `patch -l' was needed. Mailer munchies, perhaps?
Please check that what I applied is still correct.
They look fine... sorry, didn't generate against -mm but didn't expect differences. I'll update an -mm tree and give it a functional check too...
Thanks Andrew,
-Eric
Quoted 12 lines · On Fri, 02 May 2008 21:40:23 -0500 Eric Sandeen <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 10 lines · Andrew Morton
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
please cc apw on checkpatch changes.
This patch needs some help to merge against the forthcoming checkpatch-0.19. I sent your patches apw-wards.
Um, checkpatch or checkstack? :)
bah.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
hm, I wonder why one of them got a reject. `patch -l' was needed. Mailer munchies, perhaps?
Please check that what I applied is still correct.
They look fine... sorry, didn't generate against -mm but didn't expect differences. I'll update an -mm tree and give it a functional check too...
There are no changes since 2.6.25.
"find dynamic stack allocations in checkstack.pl" just doesn't apply. Hunk 1 assumes that "fix checkstack.pl arch detection" is present, but when "fix checkstack.pl arch detection" is applied, hunks 1 and 2 don't apply.