From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:56:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:56:15 -0500 Received: from phoenix.infradead.org ([195.224.96.167]:36614 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 26 Mar 2003 14:55:36 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 20:06:47 +0000 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Martin Schwidefsky Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390 update (3/9): listing & kerntypes. Message-ID: <20030326200647.C21308@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Martin Schwidefsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from schwidefsky@de.ibm.com on Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:32:12PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:32:12PM +0100, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > > > No. Either we add Kerntypes to the architecture-independent code (I'm > all > > for it!) or not at all. Cludging this into s390-specific code is a very, > > very bad idea. > Well, even if the Kerntypes gets added to the architecture-independent code > we still would need some special s390 includes to get all the types we need. The patches from the lkcd folks don't seem to need additional includes. Please argue with them instead of trying to push such changes through the backdoor.