On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:46:04AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:

On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 17:51 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:

quoted

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.

Great. Thanks Dave.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

--
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/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>