From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757438AbYDWSQn (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:16:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757219AbYDWSQY (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:16:24 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:38992 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757094AbYDWSQW (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:16:22 -0400 Message-ID: <480F7C11.8040302@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:12:33 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Cyrill Gorcunov CC: David Woodhouse , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: x86: cleanup - rename VM_MASK to X86_VM_MASK References: <200804181856.m3IIuKd4007403@hera.kernel.org> <1208917076.9212.721.camel@pmac.infradead.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > Hi David, > > actually, this CONFIG_VM86 was there even before the renaming was done. > The main questions (imo) - is there any user space application who uses > these flags? If they are - then even the idea of this patch was a bit bogus, > and I should *not* remove all these VM86 specific flags but better define them > as aliases on flags from processor-flags.h. > Hard to know. VM86 is only used by a handful of applications (DOSEMU, X.org, others?) but it's hard to know what exactly they are. The fact that noone hollered when that CONFIG_VM86 went in is probably a good hint that they don't matter, but it's hard to say for sure. -hpa