Re: Why *not* rmap, anyway?

[William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>]

On Tue, 7 May 2002, Christian Smith wrote:
>> I don't like using a data structure as an 'API'. An API ideally gives
>> you an interface to what you need to do, not how it's done. Sure, APIs
>> can become obsolete, but function calls are MUCH easier to provide
>> legacy support for than a large, complex data structure.

On Tue, May 07, 2002 at 04:23:34PM -0300, Rik van Riel wrote:
> OK, this I can agree with.
> I'd be interested in working with you towards a way of
> hiding some of the data structure manipulation behind
> a more abstract interface, kind of like what I've done
> with the -rmap stuff ... nothing outside of rmap.c
> knows about struct pte_chain and nothing should know.
> If you could help find ways in which we can abstract
> out manipulation of some more data structures I'd be
> really happy to help implement and clean up stuff.
> kind regards,

Procedural interfaces to pagetable manipulations are largely what
the BSD pmap and SVR4 HAT layers consisted of, no?

Cheers,
Bill
--
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/