Re: [PATCHSET 1/25] add support for PC-9800 architecture (apm)

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:56:19AM +0900, Osamu Tomita wrote:
>  > This patchset adds support for NEC PC-9800 architecture, against 2.5.43.
>  > Fixed bad things commented by Russell King.
>  > 
>  > PC-9800 series machines are made by NEC. But sold only in japan.
>  > Formaly, they were best sellers in japan.
>  > We port linux for PC-9800 since 2.1.57.
>  > 
>  > I'm testing 2.5.43 with this patchset on some boxes.
>  > - PC-9800 i586 UP with IDE drive
>  > - PC-9800 i686 SMP with SCSI drive
>  > - AT compatible with IDE drive (patch applied but not set CONFIG_PC9800).
>  > They works well.
>  > We are doing our best, patchset has no effect on original without configuring
>  > for PC-9800.
>  > Please apply this patchset.
> 
> The biggest sticking point as far as I'm concerned with this patchset
> is the source readability after applying it.
> Something really needs to be done about the #if pollution this
> patch adds before it's ready for inclusion. The whole patchset adds
> over 700 #if's/ifdefs/ifndefs.

Indeed, I have the same comment after browsing through the frame buffer device
and console patches.

I think the need for 32-bit character/attribute data on PC-9800 can easily be
abstracted inside a few screen specific typedefs, macros, and functions, e.g.
  - add typedef u32/u16 charattr_t
  - add scr_kmalloc() to allocate virtual console buffers
  - modify scr_readw() and friends for character/attribute data access
and a lot of the #ifdef's can be removed.

What do you think?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [e-mail]

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds