From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 18:10:02 -0500 From: Benjamin LaHaise Subject: Re: [PATCH] remove __pte_offset Message-ID: <20030304181002.A16110@redhat.com> References: <3E653012.5040503@us.ibm.com> <3E6530B3.2000906@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3E6530B3.2000906@us.ibm.com>; from haveblue@us.ibm.com on Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 03:03:15PM -0800 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave Hansen Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 03:03:15PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > ptes this time Isn't pte_to_pfn a better name? index doesn't have a type of data implied, whereas pfn does. We have to make these distinctions clearer as work like William's PAGE_SIZE is being done. -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: aart@kvack.org