Re: about relocs.c on x86

[Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>]

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 10:52 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > why not rename relocs.c to relocs_32.c?
> > 
> > it is only used for 32 bit, even it is host app.
> 
> during the big first phase of unification we generally kept file names 
> untouched if they were only present in one of the previous 
> architectures. I.e. pure 32-bit and pure 64-bit files were not renamed 
> to _32/_64.
> 
> Now that we've got lots of unified 32/64-bit files it might make sense 
> to rename the 'standalone' ones into _32/_64 if they share the same 
> directory with 32/64-bit source files - to reduce the confusion. And 
> given that for example arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.c is unified while 
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/relocs.c is 32-bit only, i'd agree with your 
> observation. Feel free to send a rename patch for such cases.

I'd argue that eliminating the _32/_64 suffixes through unification and
not adding any more would be better.  Renaming at this point seems like
the wrong side of the cost/benefit line.  When the makefiles finally get
unified, that would be a natural list of what is 32 bit-only and what
is 64 bit-only, and additional suffixes wouldn't add much to that.

Just another voice,

Harvey