[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120411171115.GE12887@google.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 10:11:15 -0700
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: drop obsolete ARCH_BOOTMEM support
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 10:03:50AM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 02:47:35PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >> From ae6cdc767f973f39cb205af4b80ff13f35a1b66e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
> >> Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 13:37:08 +0200
> >> Subject: [PATCH] x86: drop obsolete ARCH_BOOTMEM support
> >>
> >> x86 unconditionally uses NO_BOOTMEM so there is no use
> >> of the HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM support as mm/bootmem.c is the
> >> only file referencing this symbol.
> >>
> >> bootmem_arch_preferred_node() is the function referred
> >> in the mm/bootmem.c code and can thuis be dropped too.
> >>
> >> x86 was the sole user of HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM - so there is
> >> an opportunity to clean up a little in mm/bootmem.c too
> >> if we do not expect other users to emerge.
> >
> > avr32 seems to have it too?
>
> avr32 is:
>
> config HAVE_ARCH_BOOTMEM
> def_bool n
>
> so that is not used with avr32
Yeah, then better remove the reference from there too, right?
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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