[lkml]   [2010]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH -v5 0/38] x86: not use bootmem for x86
    On 01/22/2010 01:24 AM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
    > please check the patches regarding with early_res and bootmem
    > it will use early_res instead of bootmem with x86 code.
    > but still can use CONFIG_NO_BOOMEM to use bootmem or not
    > so could make transistion more smoothly
    > -v2: allocate vmemmap on one node together, and also seperate early_res
    > -v3: make x86 32 bit support early_res to use bootmem too
    > move related early_res to kernel/
    > sparse vmemmap together: address Ingo.
    > -v4: some patches could go with tip with acked-by Jesse
    > radix and logical flat etc
    > -v5: put back to 2 patches into this patch to make it consistent
    > as linus pointed out that some place should replace size_t
    > with resource_size_t, and acctually that is done already in
    > those patches in pci/linux-next.

    I have been looking at this patchset and tried it out; it has a build
    failure because of a naming conflict:

    /home/hpa/kernel/linux-2.6-tip.range/drivers/pci/hotplug/ibmphp_res.c:43: error:
    conflicting types for ‘add_range’
    /home/hpa/kernel/linux-2.6-tip.range/include/linux/range.h:9: note:
    previous declaration of ‘add_range’ was here

    "add_range" is static.

    This makes me concerned that the naming is too generic. In particular,
    we tend to prefer naming of the type subsystem_function(), so in this
    case range_add() might be a more suitable naming scheme.

    I'm going to spend more time on this patchset.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-01-26 01:45    [W:0.025 / U:8.592 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site