Andrew Morton wrote:
Zachary Amsden <[email protected]> wrote:
Yeah, I said ugly ones specificly. There's been some nice previous ones,
>but most in this series (all the move of stuff to subarches) are rather
>horrible and lack lots of explanation.
>
>
All of my previous patches have been aimed at fixing bugs, improving
performance, reliability and maintinability of the i386 architecture.
Yup, with one or two semi-exceptions, all the patches up to this series
seem to be good general cleanups - certainly it's good to move all those
open-coded asm statements into single-site inlines and macros: people keep
on screwing them up.
We do need to wake the Xen poeple up, make sure that these changes suit
them as well, or at least don't screw them over (hard to see how it could
though).
This patch in particular is still quite controversial. I know at least
Andi has objections (quite valid) to the way PAE/non-PAE was dissected,
and I would definitely like to address these concerns. Although I have
no objection to you committing it to the mm tree right now, please be
advised that Chris Wright and I will have to converge quite a bit on
this patch, and will likely be doing a substantial amount of rework here
to work out Xen compatibilty issues as well as general cleanliness. If
it is more convenient for you to live without that churn, by all means
feel free to, and we can update the patch once everyone is happy.
Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
|
|