From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Len Brown Subject: Re: mpparse_{32,64}.c merge questions Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:28:43 -0400 Message-ID: <200803111328.43314.lenb@kernel.org> References: <47CDB9D7.9030107@suse.de> <47CDBFD9.1050703@suse.de> <20080304213552.GD8944@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:39439 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751828AbYCKR3W (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:29:22 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080304213552.GD8944@elte.hu> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Cc: Alexey Starikovskiy , Andi Kleen , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" On Tuesday 04 March 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > (more folks Cc:-ed) > > * Alexey Starikovskiy wrote: > > >>> I've decided to start with merge of mpparse files, and I'd like to > >>> know your opinion on some differences... Ingo, I know you work on > >>> merging the 32/64 files, do I step on your toes? > >> > >> My suggestion would be to do a redesign first and then do that for > >> both. > > I was thinking that redesign on one file would go easier... And we > > don't need both, do we? > > we dont, but please do _not_ "redesign" anything during unification. > > try to keep it simple and bisectable. Lots of small patches. Stupid > #ifdefs if need to be. Pick the 32-bit version or the 64-bit version of > any approach, if it's obvious that the unified version will still work > fine. Ask if in doubt. I agree with Ingo on the "keep it simple" merge steps.. I can't resist mentioning, however, what I'd like to see long term. I'd like to see mpparse.o depend on CONFIG_MPS=y I'd like to be able to build CONFIG_ACPI=y and CONFIG_MPS=n Andy Grover prototyped splititing MPS from ACPI a while back, but it never made it upstream. thanks, -Len