Hi Paul, On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 12:03:27 +1100 Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 04:22:34PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Earlier, Johannes wrote > > > > : Humm, now that is a bit disappointing. Because it means we will never > > : get rid of bootmem as long as it works for the other architectures. > > : And your changeset just added ~900 lines of code, some of it being a > > : rather ugly compatibility layer in bootmem that I hoped could go away > > : again sooner than later. > > Whoa! Who's proposing to get rid of bootmem, and why? I assume that is the point of the "early_res" work already in Linus' tree starting from commit 27811d8cabe56e0c3622251b049086f49face4ff ("x86: Move range related operation to one file"). -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Attachment:
pgpkMPGl1sFY3.pgp
Description: PGP signature