Re: [tip:core/percpu] bootmem: clean up arch-specific bootmem wrapping

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 08:23:03PM +0000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Author:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > AuthorDate: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:57:20 +0900
> > Commit:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > CommitDate: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:57:20 +0900
> > 
> > bootmem: clean up arch-specific bootmem wrapping
> > 
> > Impact: cleaner and consistent bootmem wrapping
> > 
> > By setting CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM_NODE, archs can define
> > arch-specific wrappers for bootmem allocation.  However, this is done
> > a bit strangely in that only the high level convenience macros can be
> > changed while lower level, but still exported, interface functions
> > can't be wrapped.  This not only is messy but also leads to strange
> > situation where alloc_bootmem() does what the arch wants it to do but
> > the equivalent __alloc_bootmem() call doesn't although they should be
> > able to be used interchangeably.
> > 
> > This patch updates bootmem such that archs can override / wrap the
> > backend function - alloc_bootmem_core() instead of the highlevel
> > interface functions to allow simpler and consistent wrapping.  Also,
> > HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM_NODE is renamed to HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@saeurebad.de>
> 
> What does this message mean?  That the patch was commited to 
> the -tip tree?

yes.

> Well, why not... oh, right, it is broken ;-)

In your reply you pointed out a change that was not adequately 
declared plus an opportunity for a cleanup - is that what you 
mean by breakage?

	Ingo