[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080713164320.GJ1678@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2008 09:43:20 -0700
From: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...ux-mips.org>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: let 32bit use apic_ops too
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 06:54:53PM -0700, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> > > Etc... Why are you changing names of these functions? Are they meant
> > > not to apply to older APIC implementations anymore?
> >
> > because 64bit has that name.
>
> Shouldn't it be the other way round then? Our 32-bit code is the
> original one and supports more APIC variations than the 64-bit one. So at
> the point of unification 64-bit xAPIC-only functions will become universal
> ones making the naming counter-intuitive: apic_ -> any APIC, xapic_ ->
> xAPIC only. I think only functions specific to the xAPIC should have the
> xapic_ prefix.
Maciej, Yinghai's current 32bit xapic_* supports both 4-bit apic and xapic.
Yinghai, may be we should name them as apic_mem_* instead of xapic_*
or any better suggestions?
thanks,
suresh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists