Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-19 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i fixed it up by hand - the result is below - does it look OK to > > you? (Also, could you check latest x86.git whether i've picked up > > all your patches correctly - the reject might be indicative of some > > missing pieces.) > > Yo

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-19 Thread Glauber de Oliveira Costa
On Dec 19, 2007 8:17 AM, Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are moved > > to processor.h around if

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-19 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are moved > to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files are deleted. Note > that there's much less

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-18 Thread Glauber de Oliveira Costa
On Dec 18, 2007 7:32 PM, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be c

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-18 Thread Frans Pop
On Tuesday 18 December 2007, Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. T

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-18 Thread Ingo Molnar
* Glauber de Oliveira Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They a

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-18 Thread Glauber de Oliveira Costa
On Dec 18, 2007 6:54 PM, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are moved > > to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files

Re: [PATCH] finish processor.h integration

2007-12-18 Thread Frans Pop
Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > What's left in processor_32.h and processor_64.h cannot be cleanly > integrated. However, it's just a couple of definitions. They are moved > to processor.h around ifdefs, and the original files are deleted. Note > that there's much less headers included in the fi