From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com>
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:41:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l3Q1fJfB002387
	for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:41:20 -0700
Message-ID: <4630033A.5050500@sandeen.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 20:41:14 -0500
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@sandeen.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: review: allocate alloc args
References: <20070419073216.GT48531920@melbourne.sgi.com> <20070423212201.GB13572@infradead.org> <20070423223257.GM32602149@melbourne.sgi.com> <462E3DEA.1070907@sandeen.net> <20070425231131.GM48531920@melbourne.sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070425231131.GM48531920@melbourne.sgi.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com
Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com
List-Id: xfs
To: David Chinner <dgc@sgi.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>, xfs-dev <xfs-dev@sgi.com>, xfs-oss <xfs@oss.sgi.com>

David Chinner wrote:

> So this approach is not going to give us any relief in the short/medium
> term and hence I have to question the value of doing such a rework
> because in the medium/long term ia32 is no longer important.

It's been this way for so long already... I probably agree with you.

-Eric