lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: about relocs.c on x86

* Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:

> > during the big first phase of unification we generally kept file
> > names untouched if they were only present in one of the previous
> > architectures. I.e. pure 32-bit and pure 64-bit files were not
> > renamed to _32/_64.
> >
> > Now that we've got lots of unified 32/64-bit files it might make
> > sense to rename the 'standalone' ones into _32/_64 if they share the
> > same directory with 32/64-bit source files - to reduce the
> > confusion. And given that for example
> > arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.c is unified while
> > arch/x86/boot/compressed/relocs.c is 32-bit only, i'd agree with
> > your observation. Feel free to send a rename patch for such cases.
>
> I'd argue that eliminating the _32/_64 suffixes through unification
> and not adding any more would be better. Renaming at this point seems
> like the wrong side of the cost/benefit line. When the makefiles
> finally get unified, that would be a natural list of what is 32
> bit-only and what is 64 bit-only, and additional suffixes wouldn't add
> much to that.

no strong opinion from me - but i think it should be obvious to the
developer when they are looking at a .c file that it's 32-bit only (or
64-bit only). I.e. the default is that whatever .c file we look at is
unified - and in that sense relocs.c breaks that general expectation.

In fact renaming it to _32.c might spur its unification: people might
say "hm, this would be handy on 64-bit as well". We might even do that
to directories - so that for example arch/x86/math-emu/ would become
arch/x86/match-emu_32/.

( Hey, and maybe someone is crazy enough to try to port the math-emu
code to 64-bit and boot Linux up on 64-bit with all user-space FPU ops
emulated. It would be one of the most useless hacks of all times, and
that certainly has a certain kind of sick appeal to it, doesnt it? ;-))

but it's really not a big issue, we can certainly leave it alone and
observe the situation as more stuff gets unified. I'd expect it all fall
into place naturally.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-31 11:13    [W:0.069 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site