Re: mmotm 2011-06-15-16-56 uploaded (mm/page_cgroup.c)

[Dave Hansen]

On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 17:51 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> No, why was node_start_pfn() and node_end_pfn() defined optionally
> on a per-architecture basis?

Probably because it started in the NUMA-Q port, and we were still trying
to stay off the radar at that point.  It looks like it showed up in
~2.5.[3-4]?.  We didn't know what the heck we were doing back then, and
it probably leaked out from under CONFIG_NUMA/DISCONTIGMEM at some
point.

Seems like a good thing to consolidate to me.  Especially since it's
just a shortcut to the (unconditionally defined) structure member, I
can't see a real justification for needing different definitions.

-- Dave

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/