From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rene Herman Subject: Re: [patch 00/37] PNP resource_table cleanups, v2 Date: Sun, 04 May 2008 16:19:54 +0200 Message-ID: <481DC60A.7090307@keyaccess.nl> References: <20080401151634.730901933@ldl.fc.hp.com> <200804021535.22011.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> <47F4FDCB.2000803@keyaccess.nl> <200805011447.38234.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> <481DC4E2.7060803@keyaccess.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from smtpq1.groni1.gr.home.nl ([213.51.130.200]:35842 "EHLO smtpq1.groni1.gr.home.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752635AbYEDOTO (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 10:19:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: <481DC4E2.7060803@keyaccess.nl> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Rene Herman , Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Adam Belay , Li Shaohua , Matthieu Castet , Thomas Renninger , Jaroslav Kysela , Andrew Morton On 04-05-08 16:14, Rene Herman wrote: > In trying to come up with problems I'm only finding a difference in an > added failure mode with respect to the static array if we run out of > memory at a bad time and this is quite unserious. I mean, this would be an added mode when just releasing and rbuilding teh list as opposed to teh reusing, it's not a diffeerence with respect to the .index setup. So, going to completely slash struct pnp_resource again? :) Would improve things... Rene.