[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49B1B2E9.5050507@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:34:01 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
CC: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: introduce bootmem_state
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
> Please, no. system_state should be deprecated; its hard enough to have
> a notion of some kind of system-wide state, but putting subsystem
> specific substates into it just makes things worse.
>
Does it? It seems to me to have a bunch of state variables which can
interact in $DEITY knows how many ways sounds like a bad idea.
-hpa
--
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