From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751933AbZHXIsm (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:48:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751619AbZHXIsl (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:48:41 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:53492 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751309AbZHXIsl (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:48:41 -0400 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 10:48:21 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Wang, Shane" Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , Andi Kleen , "Cihula, Joseph" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "arjan@linux.intel.com" , "chrisw@sous-sol.org" , "jmorris@namei.org" , "jbeulich@novell.com" , "peterm@redhat.com" , "Wei, Gang" Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel_txt: fix the build errors of intel_txt patch on non-X86 platforms Message-ID: <20090824084821.GA29804@elte.hu> References: <20090817154055.GA12985@elte.hu> <20090817155348.GA2254@elte.hu> <037F493892196B458CD3E193E8EBAD4F01EC3AB3B2@pdsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20090820161038.GA29994@basil.fritz.box> <4A8E9B3C.5070604@intel.com> <20090821135050.GA30346@elte.hu> <4A8EBBF6.3020505@intel.com> <20090821161204.GB17731@elte.hu> <4A8ED800.30901@zytor.com> <037F493892196B458CD3E193E8EBAD4F01EC3ABB56@pdsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <037F493892196B458CD3E193E8EBAD4F01EC3ABB56@pdsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) 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=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Wang, Shane wrote: > >> > >> If then these should be dummy inlines - but in any case, do you > >> expect tboot to be used by non-x86 too? > >> > > > > It would have to be IA64 ... I can't ask Tony since he's out, but I > > would assume it is x86-specific at this point. > > > > -hpa > > Yes, to my knowledge, it is x86 at this point. TXT-SX is the > server extension also for ia32 only. Then i'd suggest to keep it simple and clean for now and move those very few lines to arch/x86 files only. It will be easy to generalize it later on, should the need arise. Ingo