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:
pgp7SPdS9YDYX.pgp
Description: PGP signature