Re: [patch 8/8] x86: apic - unify init_bsp_APIC

[Cyrill Gorcunov]

[Ingo Molnar - Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 03:48:01PM +0200]
| 
| * Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| 
| > > If that was the question, the answer would be: to unify apic_32.c 
| > > and apic_64.c we first use tiny little changes to bring the two 
| > > files in sync. Presumably, each such change is a NOP or at least 
| > > very safe - and clearly bisectable in the worst-case.
| > 
| >  If the obfuscation comes from apic_64.c, then the clean-up should be 
| > done in th other direction IMO.  Not everything that comes from the 
| > 64-bit variation is better than its 32-bit counterpart.
| 
| yeah - in fact for most unifications we did the 32-bit counterpart was 
| the cleaner one. (which is no big surprise, 80%-90% of the x86 Linux 
| use, even today, is on the 32-bit side - so most developers watch that 
| one.)
| 
| 	Ingo
| 

Thanks you both for review and comments!

Since lapic_is_integrated is just eliminated on 64bit I thought
it's better to have smooth code flow as much as possible. By 'smooth'
I mean to not use #ifdef until there is no chance to escape from.

I think I'll send next series if only merging procedure will be
completed.

And Maciej - you're so right - if someone will take a look on the
apic_64.c code now he will be quite wondered what lapic_is_integrated
is doing in 64bit code.

Ingo, I don't know but maybe you should drop the patches I sent since
they could (espec the snippet Maciej pointed to) confuse code reader
(sine merging process is not completed yet). Sorry for incovenience
and thanks again for review!

		- Cyrill -
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/