From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sc8-sf-mx1-b.sourceforge.net ([10.3.1.11] helo=sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net) by sc8-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1C4nVU-0001vM-MR for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 07 Sep 2004 14:28:04 -0700 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6] helo=mail.osdl.org) by sc8-sf-mx1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C4nVU-00018x-6b for user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 07 Sep 2004 14:28:04 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [uml-devel] Re: [patch 1/1] uml: no extraversion in arch/um/Makefile for mainline Message-Id: <20040907142613.2ab5775e.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <200409072016.01749.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> References: <20040906173524.EE034B977@zion.localdomain> <20040906193620.A8502@infradead.org> <200409072016.01749.blaisorblade_spam@yahoo.it> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: user-mode-linux-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: The user-mode Linux development list List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:26:13 -0700 To: BlaisorBlade Cc: user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, hch@infradead.org, jdike@addtoit.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org BlaisorBlade wrote: > > On Monday 06 September 2004 20:36, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Could you please fix UML to not use ghash.h and remove that one before > > playing with new toys? This has been requested a few times now. > Yes, I can try - but I'd like to know the exact reason (I'm not developing UML > as long as Jeff does). > > My idea is that ghash.h is just trivial boilerplate which does not deserve > generalized code, so that even rewriting the same exact code without using > those macros (and maybe embedding some assumptions about this usage) would be > a fine solution; also, there is just one user of it > (arch/um/kernel/physmem.c, with just one hash defined), so it shouldn't be > hard. > > However, if the problem with ghash.h is different, I need more explainations. Take one look at ghash.h and you'll see why we don't want it in the tree. ghash was removed for a while and it was not intended that it come back - it snuck back by accident. Please, rewrite that piece of UML so we can again remove ghash.h. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools! Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5047&alloc_id=10808&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list User-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel