Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754578AbXLRVc7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:32:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751777AbXLRVct (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:32:49 -0500 Received: from hpsmtp-eml15.KPNXCHANGE.COM ([213.75.38.115]:55755 "EHLO hpsmtp-eml15.kpnxchange.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751299AbXLRVcs (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:32:48 -0500 From: Frans Pop To: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" Subject: Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:32:43 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: "Glauber de Oliveira Costa" , ak@suse.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws, avi@qumranet.com, chrisw@sous-sol.org, ehabkost@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, jeremy@goop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, roland@redhat.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, zach@vmware.com References: <1198008293639-git-send-email-gcosta@redhat.com> <5d6222a80712181300l707035e7mdb8a6e0d7a5ddca8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5d6222a80712181300l707035e7mdb8a6e0d7a5ddca8@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712182232.45685.elendil@planet.nl> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2007 21:32:46.0143 (UTC) FILETIME=[87B464F0:01C841BD] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1071 Lines: 24 On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are > > > moved to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files are > > > deleted. Note that there's much less headers included in the final > > > version. > > > > Either I must be missing something or this patch was corrupted somehow. > > neither. > Note the else in the middle. It's just a mistake in the comment. Wouldn't an explicit second #ifdef block be a lot clearer (and improve maintainability) in this case? An #else can easily be overlooked among other preprocessor commands or when #ifdefs get nested. -- 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/