On 12/1/05, Russell King <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 12:11:24PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On 12/1/05, Russell King <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 01:51:15AM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> > > > So, bad example.
> > >
> > > Not in the IDE case. Bart restricted IDE to a smaller number of ARM
> > > platforms, plus any that had PCMCIA. There is no such restriction
> > > in the asm-arm/*.h header files.
> >
> > When I did this change there was such restriction in asm-arm/mach-*/ide.h
> > files (some platforms just lacked ide.h making IDE build break for them).
> >
> > IDE is a bad example anyway because of legacy ordering issues etc etc.
>
> Okay. Given the general concensus in this thread, can this be removed
> now?
No, I didn't say that I agree with DaveM. :)
For IDE keeping restriction makes it much easier to maintain
(i.e. to answer questions like "why is this ugly hack needed?").
Bartlomiej
-
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]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
