Re: [PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[Osamu Tomita <tomita@cinet.co.jp>]

Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:56:19AM +0900, Osamu Tomita wrote:
> >  > This patchset adds support for NEC PC-9800 architecture, against 2.5.43.
> >  > Fixed bad things commented by Russell King.
> >  >
> >  > PC-9800 series machines are made by NEC. But sold only in japan.
> >  > Formaly, they were best sellers in japan.
> >  > We port linux for PC-9800 since 2.1.57.
> >  >
> >  > I'm testing 2.5.43 with this patchset on some boxes.
> >  > - PC-9800 i586 UP with IDE drive
> >  > - PC-9800 i686 SMP with SCSI drive
> >  > - AT compatible with IDE drive (patch applied but not set CONFIG_PC9800).
> >  > They works well.
> >  > We are doing our best, patchset has no effect on original without configuring
> >  > for PC-9800.
> >  > Please apply this patchset.
> >
> > The biggest sticking point as far as I'm concerned with this patchset
> > is the source readability after applying it.
> > Something really needs to be done about the #if pollution this
> > patch adds before it's ready for inclusion. The whole patchset adds
> > over 700 #if's/ifdefs/ifndefs.
> 
> Indeed, I have the same comment after browsing through the frame buffer device
> and console patches.
> 
> I think the need for 32-bit character/attribute data on PC-9800 can easily be
> abstracted inside a few screen specific typedefs, macros, and functions, e.g.
>   - add typedef u32/u16 charattr_t
>   - add scr_kmalloc() to allocate virtual console buffers
>   - modify scr_readw() and friends for character/attribute data access
> and a lot of the #ifdef's can be removed.
> 
> What do you think?
Indeed. I'll try it in next step. Thank you very much.

Regards
Osamu Tomita