Re: [PATCH] i386: srat and numaq cleanup

[Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>]

On 10/6/05, Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 19:29 +0900, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > On 10/6/05, Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > I'm highly suspicious of any "cleanup" that adds more code than it
> > > deletes.  What does this clean up?
> >
> > The patch removes #ifdefs from get_memcfg_numa() and introduces an
> > inline get_zholes_size(). The #ifdefs are moved down one level to the
> > files srat.h and numaq.h and empty inline functions are added. These
> > empty inline function are probably the reason for the added lines.
>
> It does remove two #ifdefs, but it adds two #else blocks in other
> places.
>
> I also noticed that acpi20_parse_srat() can fail.  So, has_srat may
> belong in that function, not in get_memcfg_from_srat()

Yes, that is better.

> Why ever have this block?
>
> > +       if ((ret = get_zholes_size_numaq(nid)))
> > +               return ret;
>
> get_zholes_size_numaq() is *ALWAYS* empty/false, right?  There's no need
> to have a stub for it.

That is correct. I just kept it there to make the srat and numaq code
more similar, but I'd be happy to remove it. If you still consider
this as a cleanup, please let me know and I will generate a new patch.

Thanks,

/ magnus

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>