Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1755074AbYC1QEW@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755074AbYC1QEW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:04:22 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753995AbYC1QEJ
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:04:09 -0400
Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:47251 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753927AbYC1QEI (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 28 Mar 2008 12:04:08 -0400
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 17:03:38 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com>,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, haveblue@us.ibm.com,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
       "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
       Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
       Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 09/10] Hugetlb common code update for System z.
Message-ID: <20080328160338.GA5687@elte.hu>
References: <20080312173155.703966894@de.ibm.com> <20080312173218.186436562@de.ibm.com> <1205344286.9828.91.camel@nimitz.home.sr71.net> <1205363937.5237.60.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080312164303.cac9cab5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1206713119.5186.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080328140634.GA29218@elte.hu> <1206719599.6592.10.camel@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1206719599.6592.10.camel@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean
X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5
X-ELTE-SpamLevel: 
X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no
X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 
X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3
	-1.5 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1774
Lines: 36


* Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> > >  include/asm-sh/hugetlb.h      |   28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  include/asm-sparc64/hugetlb.h |   30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  include/asm-x86/hugetlb.h     |   28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 
> > these seem largely duplicated - shouldnt there be an 
> > asm-generic/hugetlb.h instead, which asm/hugetlb.h could include to 
> > get default behavior? It would probably reduce the linecount of your 
> > patch as well.
> 
> Well the hugetlbfs primitives are architecture specific, aren't they? 
> Just like the other page table manipulation functions. I find the 
> usual method to use asm-generic/<xxx> and a lot of defines and #ifdefs 
> to pick up the correct definition from a generic header file rather 
> hard to read. In the end each arch that wants to use hugetlbfs has to 
> define each of the hugetlb primitives. Most of them are rather simple, 
> e.g. the x86 set_huge_pte_at is just a set_pte_at. One line to define 
> the primitive. Now we could have an #ifdef block around the default 
> definition that maps set_huge_pte_at to set_pte_at in asm-generic and 
> an ARCH_HAS_xx override for architecture that need to do something 
> more complicated. Somehow that was where we started .. I think the 
> best way to get rid of the ARCH_HAS_xxx fugliness is to let each 
> architecture define their primitives, even if it looks like code 
> duplication.

sorry, i misread your patch - it indeed looks cleaner with your patch 
applied.

	Ingo
--
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/