> > This should really be in a .c file in mach-summit. I know a single line file
> > with just a variable in it is a bit strange, but the principle of the subarch
> > stuff is to have anything subarch specific (which this is) in mach-<subarch>.
> That's pretty pointless for one variable. I think you're taking things
> to ridiculous extremes.
OK, I agree that a single .c file for one variable is very extreme. I think
you also would agree with me that if it had been ten variables and an exported
function then it should live in a separate .c file in the summit specific code.
My concern is that there will come a day when the summit code is enhanced to
add the extra nine variables and the function. Since there's nowhere in
mach-summit to add them, they get added to smpboot.c. Now we have a go around
on linux-kernel about why they should be in a separate .c file.
You see the issue: I code by looking at how someone else did it, so if we're
setting a precedent then it should be done correctly rather than catching and
correcting a mistake we expect someone will now make.
If you can promise me that summit will never need an extra variable or
exported function as the code evolves from now until the end of the
architecture then I can live with summit_x86 in the main line.
James
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 15 2002 - 22:00:56 EST