On 15.11.2006 [17:31:32 +0000], Adam Litke wrote: > On Wed, 2006-11-15 at 10:43 +1100, David Gibson wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 14, 2006 at 09:48:16AM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > > David, > > > > > > On 14.11.2006 [09:10:25 -0600], Adam Litke wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 14:50 +1100, David Gibson wrote: > > > > > +/* Possibly these functions should go in the library itself.. */ > > > > > > > > Yes, exactly what I was going to suggest. These are sufficiently > > > > useful to other potential users that I think they should go in > > > > hugeutils.c from the start. Other than that, looks good to me. > > > > > > Can you resend with this change? > > > > I'd prefer to delay on that and do it as a separate patch. > > > > Now that libhugetlbfs is out there, we want to be careful with the > > ABI. That's why I didn't put these functions straight into the > > library - I want to think a bit harder about whether they're a good > > interface first. > > Fair enough. Then I suppose testutils.c is the proper place to put the > functions until we make the decision on the interface.
Ok, David, are you willing to put them in testutils.c then (with a new patch) and then we can move them around if we want to, later? Thanks, Nish -- Nishanth Aravamudan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> IBM Linux Technology Center ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Libhugetlbfs-devel mailing list Libhugetlbfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libhugetlbfs-devel
