Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce bootmem_state

H. Peter Anvin
2009-03-07T00:15:29Z

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> The total number of states is always going to be subsys1 * subsys2 *
> ..., but folding them all into one state variable only makes sense if we
> have a well-defined set of states *and* transitions between them. But
> even then it implies that we have enough coupling between our subsystems
> that we would even care what their aggregate state is, which is already
> a bad idea. If we keep the internal workings of our subsystems as
> internal details, then having private state variables is the way to go.
>
> The real problem with system_state is that it has a few broadly-defined
> values, but no real explanation of what they mean, so they end up
> getting used in inappropriate ways (like the virt_addr_valid() thing I
> fixed yesterday).
>

Obviously.

-hpa