On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:31:24AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > On 05/14/2012 11:42 PM, Seth Jennings wrote: > > > On 05/14/2012 03:45 AM, Minchan Kim wrote: > > > >> Exactly speaking, zram should has dependency with > >> zsmalloc, not x86. So x86 dependeny check is redundant. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> drivers/staging/zram/Kconfig | 4 +--- > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/zram/Kconfig b/drivers/staging/zram/Kconfig > >> index 9d11a4c..ee23a86 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/staging/zram/Kconfig > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/zram/Kconfig > >> @@ -1,8 +1,6 @@ > >> config ZRAM > >> tristate "Compressed RAM block device support" > >> - # X86 dependency is because zsmalloc uses non-portable pte/tlb > >> - # functions > >> - depends on BLOCK && SYSFS && X86 > >> + depends on BLOCK && SYSFS > > > > > > Two comments here: > > > > 1) zram should really depend on ZSMALLOC instead of selecting it > > because, as the patch has it, zram could be selected on an arch that > > zsmalloc doesn't support. > > > Argh, Totally my mistake. my patch didn't match with my comment, either. :( > > > > > 2) This change would need to be done in zcache as well. > > > I see. > Seth, Thanks. > > send v2. It's all messed up with tabs and spaces, care to resend? thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>