On Sat, 2009-09-19 at 15:44 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 05:17:08PM -0700, Alok Kataria wrote: > > Given this new development, I wanted to discuss how should we go about > > retiring the VMI code from mainline Linux, i.e. the vmi_32.c and > > vmiclock_32.c bits. > > > > One of the options that I am contemplating is to drop the code from the > > tip tree in this release cycle, and given that this should be a low risk > > change we can remove it from Linus's tree later in the merge cycle. > > That sounds good to me, how intrusive are the patches to do this? It's a single patch, and the changes are pretty much self contained, meat of the patch comprises of removing the vmi_32.c and vmiclock_32.c file. I don't think we may want to break the changes down. Below are the diffstats, let me post the patch in a separate mail. ==== Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt | 2 arch/x86/Kconfig | 10 arch/x86/include/asm/vmi.h | 269 ---------- arch/x86/include/asm/vmi_time.h | 98 ---- arch/x86/kernel/Makefile | 1 arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 7 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c | 9 arch/x86/kernel/vmi_32.c | 913 ----------------------------------- arch/x86/kernel/vmiclock_32.c | 321 ------------ 9 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1629 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 arch/x86/include/asm/vmi.h delete mode 100644 arch/x86/include/asm/vmi_time.h delete mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/vmi_32.c delete mode 100644 arch/x86/kernel/vmiclock_32.c ==== > Is it going to be tricky to get everything merged properly in -tip > for it? IMO, shouldn't be a problem. Thanks, Alok _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
