Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:32:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:32:01 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-5-cust12.swa.cable.ntl.com ([80.5.121.12]:13042 "EHLO irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 6 Aug 2002 12:32:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] NUMA-Q xquad_portio declaration From: Alan Cox To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel , colpatch@us.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <1245189818.1028621171@[10.10.2.3]> References: <1028649942.18130.172.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <1245189818.1028621171@[10.10.2.3]> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.3 (1.0.3-6) Date: 06 Aug 2002 18:54:31 +0100 Message-Id: <1028656471.18156.179.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1020 Lines: 20 On Tue, 2002-08-06 at 16:06, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > The STANDALONE thing? I'm not convinced that's really any cleaner, > it makes even more of a mess of io.h than there was already (though > we could consider that a lost cause ;-)). > > What's your objection to just throwing in a defn of xquad_portio? > A preference for burying the messy stuff in header files? Seems to > me that as you have to define STANDALONE now, the point is moot. Because you are assuming there will be -one- kind of wackomatic PC system - IBM's. The chances are there will be more than one as other vendors like HP, Compaq and Dell begin shipping stuff. Having __STANDALONE__ works for all the cases instead of exporting xquad this hpmagic that and compaq the other in an ever growing cess pit - 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/