Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 07:53:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 07:53:09 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:15876 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 07:53:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:56:43 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Alan Cox Cc: Andi Kleen , Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 64bit clean drivers was Re: Linux 2.4.20-pre1 Message-ID: <20020807135643.A9340@wotan.suse.de> References: <20020807131813.A25485@wotan.suse.de> <200208071151.g77Bpmt19650@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200208071151.g77Bpmt19650@devserv.devel.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 961 Lines: 21 > In a perfect would I'd be able to have config_experimental let me pick all > the stuff not tested on x86_64. To do that sanely we have to fix the > configuration language otherwise it will just never be maintainable and > we will spend the rest of 2.4 haunted by "Why has xyz vanished on Alpha > in 2.4.21" I severly doubt this will a problem. If you look at the drivers that I marked this way on x86-64 I will bet some beer that they never worked (some not even compiled) on alpha. Worrying about a userbase of drivers who have never worked does not seem to be very useful. It definitely would not be a regression at least. Can you please shortly explain what will not be maintainable with my proposal? -Andi - 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/