From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from over.ny.us.ibm.com (over.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.150]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "over.ny.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B74A67A71 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2005 07:07:23 +1100 (EST) Received: from e31.co.us.ibm.com (e31.esmtp.ibm.com [9.14.4.129]) by pokfb.esmtp.ibm.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j29K1fZc004880 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 15:01:42 -0500 Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 14:01:09 -0600 To: Stephen Rothwell Message-ID: <20050309200109.GG1220@austin.ibm.com> References: <20050309120343.0c22eb0f.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20050309120343.0c22eb0f.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> From: Linas Vepstas Cc: ppc64-dev , ppc-dev Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] combining header files List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 12:03:43PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell was heard to remark: > Hi all, > > I would just like to start a discussion about consolidating (some of) the > ppc and ppc64 header files. As a starting point (am I am not saying that > this is the right way to go) the following patch replaces (semantically) > equivalent ppc64 headers files by just including the asm-ppc file. Why not #include instead? > We *could* use this method to make the journey incremental until there > are no nontrivial files left in asm-ppc64 .... sounds good to me. --linas