From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754617AbYDXInh (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:43:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751262AbYDXIn3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:43:29 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.154]:63180 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751257AbYDXIn2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Apr 2008 04:43:28 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=NrVIXk25ni7bSBgx7oa7UgkdsiSnvEkc4xNQvXlWEDfhWgRg5okdNjiRaOE+ECh044jAZaXVahtsndtiR2ZsZGu8bzTwm6bVp53oP0GKaqRZgs3h/GrKyOHz9e8uwpVITfqrlgmoNYTgvZA+jU6YHOmJOor2ELnIbZcDxnlnR8U= Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 12:42:41 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: David Woodhouse Cc: Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: vm86 - hide X86_VM_MASK from userland programs Message-ID: <20080424084241.GA8624@cvg> References: <20080424083558.GA7749@cvg> <1209026364.9212.978.camel@pmac.infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1209026364.9212.978.camel@pmac.infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [David Woodhouse - Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 09:39:24AM +0100] | On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 12:35 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: | > X86_VM_MASK is a kernel specific flag so lets hide it from | > userland programs | > | > Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov | | Since and there's already an #ifdef __KERNEL__ section later on in the | file, and since X86_VM_MASK isn't used before that, I probably would | have been inclined to shift it down there instead of adding a new | #ifdef. | | But maybe I should just stop heckling... :) | | -- | dwmw2 | I was thought about that too ;) David, I'll recheck this all today evening (have to go to office now). And please continue heckling - it allows to make this file in particular *better*, so I think it's ok ;) - Cyrill -