From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: pte_offset_map for ppc assumes HIGHPTE From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:10:15 +1000 Message-Id: <1185405015.5439.369.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Satya Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2007-07-25 at 17:16 -0500, Satya wrote: > hello, > The implementation of pte_offset_map() for ppc assumes that PTEs are > kept in highmem (CONFIG_HIGHPTE). There is only one implmentation of > pte_offset_map() as follows (include/asm-ppc/pgtable.h): > > #define pte_offset_map(dir, addr) \ > ((pte_t *) kmap_atomic(pmd_page(*(dir)), KM_PTE0) + pte_index(addr)) > > Shouldn't this be made conditional according to CONFIG_HIGHPTE is > defined or not (as implemented in include/asm-i386/pgtable.h) ? > > the same goes for pte_offset_map_nested and the corresponding unmap functions. Do we have CONFIG_HIGHMEM without CONFIG_HIGHPTE ? If yes, then indeed, we should change that. Though I'm not sure I see the point of splitting those 2 options. Ben. -- 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/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org