From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759869AbYHOOpX (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:45:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755004AbYHOOpK (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:45:10 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.157]:51212 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753031AbYHOOpI (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:45:08 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=lIHG+o0Rq0msVbAHM0KduNubAps/G7dLnwlLl17AOhe5+KqfJpoqvzlDEDHrNIXNyJ Igps15GmY1e5hV65iDETcsG8vr13X2J1ZY+lTtjd72AgVGEhss15pMAXPupKoNJAkRKm b8ZiaHZRVrBvQNM5aSqfhel2vewa5XphIhnms= Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2008 18:45:09 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Ingo Molnar Cc: "Maciej W. Rozycki" , tglx@linutronix.de, hpa@zytor.com, yhlu.kernel@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 8/8] x86: apic - unify init_bsp_APIC Message-ID: <20080815144509.GA7178@lenovo> References: <20080814183428.550709025@gmail.com> <20080814184652.475361864@gmail.com> <20080815115147.GA32726@elte.hu> <20080815134801.GA14103@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080815134801.GA14103@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Ingo Molnar - Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 03:48:01PM +0200] | | * Maciej W. Rozycki 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 -