[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] Update defconfigs for CONFIG_HUGETLB

To: Adrian Bunk <>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] Update defconfigs for CONFIG_HUGETLB
From: Adam Litke <>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:12:08 -0400
Cc: linux-mm <>,,,, Eric B Munson <>,,,,,,,
In-reply-to: <>
Organization: IBM
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <1213296540.17108.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1213296945.17108.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <>
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 22:36 +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 02:55:45PM -0400, Adam Litke wrote:
> > Update all defconfigs that specify a default configuration for hugetlbfs.
> > There is now only one option: CONFIG_HUGETLB.  Replace the old
> > CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE and CONFIG_HUGETLBFS options with the new one.  I found 
> > no
> > cases where CONFIG_HUGETLBFS and CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE had different values so
> > this patch is large but completely mechanical:
> >...
> >  335 files changed, 335 insertions(+), 385 deletions(-)
> >...
> Please don't do this kind of patches - it doesn't bring any advantage 
> but can create tons of patch conflicts.
> The next time a defconfig gets updated it will anyway automatically be 
> fixed, and for defconfigs that aren't updated it doesn't create any 
> problems to keep them as they are today until they might one day get 
> updated.

Thanks for taking a look.  I am not sure if I have ever seen a defconfig
patch hit the mailing list before and I was wondering how those changes
happen.  In any case I am perfectly happy to drop this huge patch and
stick with just the first one.

Adam Litke - (agl at
IBM Linux Technology Center

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>