Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: signal: unify signal_{32|64}.c

[Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com> wrote:
> 
>> From: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>
>>
>> Impact: cleanup
>>
>> Add #ifdef directive for 32-bit only code and unify signal_{32|64}.c
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@ct.jp.nec.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/x86/kernel/Makefile    |    2 +-
>>  arch/x86/kernel/signal.c    |  915 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  arch/x86/kernel/signal_32.c |  909 ------------------------------------------
>>  arch/x86/kernel/signal_64.c |  801 -------------------------------------
>>  4 files changed, 916 insertions(+), 1711 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
>>  delete mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/signal_32.c
>>  delete mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/signal_64.c
> 
> yay! :-)
> 
> applied to tip/x86/signal, thanks Hiroshi!
> 
> One small detail, i inserted yet another commit in the middle:
> 
>  5ceb40d: x86: signal: unify signal_{32|64}.c
>  e5fa2d0: x86: signal: unify signal_{32|64}.c, prepare
>  bfeb91a: x86: signal: cosmetic unification of __setup_sigframe() and __setup_rt_sigframe()
>  2601657: x86: signal: move {setup|restore}_sigcontext()
> 
> the e5fa2d0 commit (see it below) contains all the non-mechanic 
> modifications that you did in the final unification commit. It's best 
> to keep this separate - because a big unification commit is hard to 
> review and debug, should it cause any problems.

Hi Ingo,

thanks for the above change, I think I was in a hurry because of
Thanksgiving Day week.

thanks,
Hiroshi Shimamoto