From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Litke Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:12:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] Update defconfigs for CONFIG_HUGETLB Message-Id: <1213380728.15016.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: References: <1213296540.17108.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1213296945.17108.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080612193638.GB17231@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> In-Reply-To: <20080612193638.GB17231@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Adrian Bunk Cc: linux-mm , npiggin@suse.de, nacc@us.ibm.com, mel@csn.ul.ie, Eric B Munson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 22:36 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 02:55:45PM -0400, Adam Litke wrote: > > Update all defconfigs that specify a default configuration for hugetlbfs. > > There is now only one option: CONFIG_HUGETLB. Replace the old > > CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE and CONFIG_HUGETLBFS options with the new one. I found no > > cases where CONFIG_HUGETLBFS and CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE had different values so > > this patch is large but completely mechanical: > >... > > 335 files changed, 335 insertions(+), 385 deletions(-) > >... > > Please don't do this kind of patches - it doesn't bring any advantage > but can create tons of patch conflicts. > > The next time a defconfig gets updated it will anyway automatically be > fixed, and for defconfigs that aren't updated it doesn't create any > problems to keep them as they are today until they might one day get > updated. Thanks for taking a look. I am not sure if I have ever seen a defconfig patch hit the mailing list before and I was wondering how those changes happen. In any case I am perfectly happy to drop this huge patch and stick with just the first one. -- Adam Litke - (agl at us.ibm.com) IBM Linux Technology Center