From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [build fix] Re: [GIT PATCH] SCSI part 1 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 08:41:06 -0600 Message-ID: <20080716144106.GD25255@parisc-linux.org> References: <1216138543.3312.60.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080716101634.GA8494@elte.hu> <20080716103337.GA22931@elte.hu> <20080716131543.GA3673@elte.hu> <1216216320.3230.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080716141805.GB22631@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:42863 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755552AbYGPOlI (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Jul 2008 10:41:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080716141805.GB22631@elte.hu> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: James Bottomley , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , linux-scsi , linux-kernel On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 04:18:05PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > btw., about the technical aspects of the solution, i'm not sure i like > these big #ifdef blocks: It's partly the nature of the beast. There's already several large #ifdef blocks in compat_ioctl.c -- CONFIG_NET, CONFIG_VT, CONFIG_SPARC, etc. I think what would help is a bit more grouping so individual blocks get bigger. -- Intel are signing my paycheques ... these opinions are still mine "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."