From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263733AbTKKSgu (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:36:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263742AbTKKSgu (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:36:50 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:18060 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263733AbTKKSgt (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:36:49 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:36:42 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: "Martin J. Bligh" cc: Erik Jacobson , Subject: Re: 2.6 /proc/interrupts fails on systems with many CPUs In-Reply-To: <12800000.1068577034@flay> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 11 Nov 2003, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > > OK, I was actually trying to avoid the use of vmalloc, instead of the > unconditional conversion to vmalloc, which is what the original patch did ;-) Yes, I realize that, but it's the old case of "I'm totally faithful to my husband - I never sleep with other men when he is around" joke. Basically, if it's wrong to use, it's wrong to use even occasionally. In fact, having two different code-paths just makes the code worse. Yes, I realize that sometimes you have to do it that way, and it might be the simplest way to fix something. In this case, though, the cost and fragility of a generic interface is not worth it, since the problem isn't actually in the generic code at all.. Linus