On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 10:31 -0500, Emil Medve wrote: > Hello Kumar, > > > On 03/26/2015 10:18 AM, Kumar Gala wrote: > > Why no commit message with what issue this change was trying to fix? > > A while back, when I attempted to remove bootmem (in favor of just plain > memblock as in powerpc land bootmem was just a wrapper to memblock > anyway) I run at some point into a problem with an intermediate address > value because of this '<< PAGE_SHIFT' on the wrong width variable. Using > PFN_PHYS() took care of it (it has a cast) so I decided to get this > defensive patch applied. Since, I dropped my bootmem/memblock patches in > favor to Anton's (Blanchard) work so my concrete issue example is > somewhat gone
I'm not a big fan of it unless it's actually fixing an issue. It's a lot of churn and the end result is less readable IMHO. cheers _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
