From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: "Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com>
Cc: "Guo, Racing" <racing.guo@intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, "Yu, Luming" <luming.yu@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]porting lockless mce from x86_64 to i386
Date: 2 May 2005 19:15:51 +0200
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 19:15:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050502171551.GG27150@muc.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <88056F38E9E48644A0F562A38C64FB60049EED02@scsmsx403.amr.corp.intel.com>
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 09:15:07AM -0700, Pallipadi, Venkatesh wrote:
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
> >[mailto:linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Guo, Racing
> >Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2005 6:02 PM
> >To: Andi Kleen; Andrew Morton
> >Cc: Yu, Luming; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> >Subject: RE: [PATCH]porting lockless mce from x86_64 to i386
> >
> >>
> >>If Luming would not move the mce.c file from x86-64 to i386 then
> >>his patch would be only 1/4 as big. I dont know why he does this
> >>anyways, it seems completely pointless.
> >
> >mce.c mce.h and mce_intel.c are moved from x86_64 to i386. so the
> >patch is very big. The motivation is to share mce code between
> >x86_64 and i386 and avoid duplicate code in x86_64 and i386.
> >I don't know whether I completely understand what you point.
> >Correct me if I am wrong.
>
> I think what Andi meant was that instead of copying code from x86-64
> to i386 and making x86-64 link to this i386 copy, you can leave the
> code in x86-64 and link it from i386 part of the tree.
Yep.
>
> Doing it either way should be OK with this mce code. But I feel,
> despite of the patch size, it is better to keep all the shared
> code in i386 tree and link it from x86-64. Otherwise, it may become
> kind of messy in future, with various links between i386 and x86-64.
i386 already uses code from x86-64 (earlyprintk.c) - it is nothing
new.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-02 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-02 16:15 [PATCH]porting lockless mce from x86_64 to i386 Pallipadi, Venkatesh
2005-05-02 17:15 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-05-02 18:31 ` Andrew Morton
2005-05-02 19:11 ` Andi Kleen
2005-05-02 19:36 ` Andrew Morton
2005-05-05 15:14 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-05-03 16:16 ` Bill Davidsen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-05-02 1:01 Guo, Racing
2005-05-02 16:10 ` Andi Kleen
2005-04-29 16:42 Yu, Luming
[not found] <200504261327.30928.luming.yu@intel.com>
2005-04-27 12:38 ` Andi Kleen
2005-04-27 18:38 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-29 15:27 ` Andi Kleen
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=20050502171551.GG27150@muc.de \
--to=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luming.yu@intel.com \
--cc=racing.guo@intel.com \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com \
/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