Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2004 00:02:13 -0700
From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mbligh@aracnet.com, akpm@osdl.org,
       wli@holomorphy.com, colpatch@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mask ADT: new mask.h file [2/22]
Message-Id: <20040406000213.119df23b.pj@sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <1081233543.15274.190.camel@bach>
References: <20040329041253.5cd281a5.pj@sgi.com>
	<1081128401.18831.6.camel@bach>
	<20040405000528.513a4af8.pj@sgi.com>
	<1081150967.20543.23.camel@bach>
	<20040405010839.65bf8f1c.pj@sgi.com>
	<1081227547.15274.153.camel@bach>
	<20040405230601.62c0b84c.pj@sgi.com>
	<1081233543.15274.190.camel@bach>
Organization: SGI
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 927
Lines: 24

Rusty wrote:
> Agreed.  That's a big benefit of cutting it out altogether.

And if it wasn't that this would result in requiring every call to
specify the number of bits, resulting in one more chance for a stupid
error, and one less for type checking, I'd vote to remove
cpumask_t/nodemask_t, as I understand you would prefer.

One should resist infrastructure if one can nuke a layer entirely.

But half-baked layers introduce one more form of difficult to
remember inconsistency.

Hmmm ... 

-- 
                          I won't rest till it's the best ...
                          Programmer, Linux Scalability
                          Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.650.933.1373
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/