Return-Path: Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:06:34 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [patch 09/10] Hugetlb common code update for System z. Message-ID: <20080328140634.GA29218@elte.hu> References: <20080312173155.703966894@de.ibm.com> <20080312173218.186436562@de.ibm.com> <1205344286.9828.91.camel@nimitz.home.sr71.net> <1205363937.5237.60.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080312164303.cac9cab5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1206713119.5186.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1206713119.5186.52.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Gerald Schaefer Cc: Andrew Morton , haveblue@us.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Tony Luck , Paul Mackerras , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Mundt List-ID: * Gerald Schaefer wrote: > include/asm-sh/hugetlb.h | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/asm-sparc64/hugetlb.h | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > include/asm-x86/hugetlb.h | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ these seem largely duplicated - shouldnt there be an asm-generic/hugetlb.h instead, which asm/hugetlb.h could include to get default behavior? It would probably reduce the linecount of your patch as well. Ingo