Re: MAINTAINERS file out of date?

[Eric W. Biederman]

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> A lot of that code (although, of course, not all) could be written in C,
>>> though.  I'm thinking of taking a stab at rewriting it that way.
>> 
>> That would require a new compiler, right? I don't think that would
>> make users very happy.
>> 
>> Besides the code is not exactly that maintenance intensive and only
>> changes rarely so I don't need a pressing need to rewrite it
>
> No, it would not need a new compiler.  All it requires is gcc plus a
> reasonably recent binutils which you need anyway.

There opportunities to enhance this code without writing it in C.
Such as building the code out comprehensible single of subroutines,
with a well defined calling sequence.

The big benefit when you can go to C is that you can include headers
from elsewhere in the kernel and since setup.S is increasingly
becoming optional it has a fixed interface to the rest of
the kernel, so there is much less opportunity for enhancement there.

Eric
-
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/