Re: mpparse_{32,64}.c merge questions
- From: Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:28:43 -0400
On Tuesday 04 March 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
(more folks Cc:-ed)
* Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
I was thinking that redesign on one file would go easier... And weI've decided to start with merge of mpparse files, and I'd like to
know your opinion on some differences... Ingo, I know you work on
merging the 32/64 files, do I step on your toes?
My suggestion would be to do a redesign first and then do that for
both.
don't need both, do we?
we dont, but please do _not_ "redesign" anything during unification.
try to keep it simple and bisectable. Lots of small patches. Stupid
#ifdefs if need to be. Pick the 32-bit version or the 64-bit version of
any approach, if it's obvious that the unified version will still work
fine. Ask if in doubt.
I agree with Ingo on the "keep it simple" merge steps..
I can't resist mentioning, however, what I'd like to see long term.
I'd like to see mpparse.o depend on CONFIG_MPS=y
I'd like to be able to build CONFIG_ACPI=y and CONFIG_MPS=n
Andy Grover prototyped splititing MPS from ACPI a while back,
but it never made it upstream.
thanks,
-Len
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: mpparse_{32,64}.c merge questions
- From: Ingo Molnar
- Re: mpparse_{32,64}.c merge questions
- From: Alexey Starikovskiy
- Re: mpparse_{32,64}.c merge questions
- Prev by Date: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet
- Next by Date: Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH] cpuidle: avoid singing capacitors
- Previous by thread: [PATCH -mm] ne2: needs more 8390 support functions
- Next by thread: Re: mpparse_{32,64}.c merge questions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
