From: Raul Miller <moth@magenta.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
Cc: linux-os@analogic.com, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
discuss@x86-64.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: RFC: let x86_64 no longer define X86
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:35:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041119083517.A22958@links.magenta.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <419DEF79.2090309@pobox.com>; from jgarzik@pobox.com on Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 08:04:57AM -0500
> linux-os wrote:
> > Why CONFIG_ISA_BROKEN. That implies (states) that its broken and
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 08:04:57AM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> The name is appropriate because the drivers in question _are_ broken.
On some architectures -- this is a porting issue, and not a clean binary
distinction.
ASSUMES_32_BIT or some other "32 bit" name would probably better capture
this particular issue.
Even better might be to get the compiler to catch the most obvious
mistakes and use #define decorations to override the compiler's
determination (you'd need two of these, because the compiler can get
this wrong in two different ways).
--
Raul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-19 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-19 0:51 RFC: let x86_64 no longer define X86 Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 1:14 ` Nick Piggin
2004-11-19 1:19 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 1:31 ` [discuss] " Paul Menage
2004-11-19 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 12:40 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 13:29 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 8:51 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 10:21 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 10:34 ` [discuss] " Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 11:28 ` David Woodhouse
2004-11-19 11:55 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 11:50 ` David Woodhouse
2004-11-19 12:05 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 12:12 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 12:19 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 12:37 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 12:45 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 12:55 ` linux-os
2004-11-19 13:04 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-11-19 13:35 ` Raul Miller [this message]
2004-11-19 14:11 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 13:58 ` David Woodhouse
2004-11-19 12:05 ` Adrian Bunk
2004-11-19 12:09 ` Andi Kleen
2004-11-19 11:18 ` Takashi Iwai
2004-11-19 22:31 ` Paul Mackerras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20041119083517.A22958@links.magenta.com \
--to=moth@magenta.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bunk@stusta.de \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-os@analogic.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox