From: Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, racing.guo@intel.com,
luming.yu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH]porting lockless mce from x86_64 to i386
Date: 2 May 2005 21:11:59 +0200
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 21:11:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050502191159.GI27150@muc.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050502113125.19320ceb.akpm@osdl.org>
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 11:31:25AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > 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.
>
> I must say I don't like the bidirectional sharing either.
Why exactly? X86-64 is not a "slave" of i386, they are equal peers;
free to share from each other, but none better than the other ... ,-)
-Andi (fighting for the rights of the repressed architectures ;-)
>
> But I guess it'll be simple enough to fix up if it causes any real problems
> in the future.
The only complaint I heard so far was from a kernel hacker who deleted
all non i386 architectures in his kernel trees, but I was not
very sympathetic to that one. In fact I think it is better
when people have full trees around so when they change something
globally grep finds really all instances.
-Andi
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-02 19:12 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
2005-05-02 18:31 ` Andrew Morton
2005-05-02 19:11 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
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=20050502191159.GI27150@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