From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752089AbWFLQZg (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:25:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752088AbWFLQZg (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:25:36 -0400 Received: from hellhawk.shadowen.org ([80.68.90.175]:20240 "EHLO hellhawk.shadowen.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752087AbWFLQZf (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 12:25:35 -0400 Message-ID: <448D9577.3040903@shadowen.org> Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:25:27 +0100 From: Andy Whitcroft User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051017) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Franck CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [SPARSEMEM] confusing uses of SPARSEM_EXTREME (try #2) References: <448D1117.8010407@innova-card.com> In-Reply-To: <448D1117.8010407@innova-card.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > Is it me or the use of CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_EXTREME is really confusing in > mm/sparce.c ? Shouldn't we use CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_STATIC instead like > the following patch suggests ? > > -- >8 -- > Subject: [PATCH] Remove confusing uses of SPARSEMEM_EXTREME > > CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_EXTREME is used in sparce.c whereas > CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_STATIC seems to be more appropriate. > > Signed-off-by: Franck Bui-Huu In my mind the positive option is selecting for code supporting EXTREME so it seems to make sense to use that option. Perhaps the confusion comes from a lack of comments there to say that the else case is STATIC. -apw