From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:49:54 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: Query on remap_pfn_range compatibility Message-ID: <20050124174954.GF10843@holomorphy.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton List-ID: On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 10:54:22AM -0600, Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com wrote: > I read the messages on lkml from September 2004 about the introduction of > remap_pfn_range and have a question related to coding for it. What do you > recommend for driver coding to be compatible with these functions > (remap_page_range, remap_pfn_range)? > For example, I see at least two (or three) combination I need to address: > - 2.4 (with remap_page_range) OR 2.6.x (with remap_page_range) > - 2.6.x-mm (with remap_pfn_range) > Is there some symbol or #ifdef value I can depend on to determine which > function I should be calling (and the value to pass in)? Not sure. One on kernel version being <= 2.6.10 would probably serve your purposes, though it's not particularly well thought of. I suspect people would suggest splitting up the codebase instead of sharing it between 2.4.x and 2.6.x, where I've no idea how well that sits with you. I vaguely suspected something like this would happen, but there were serious and legitimate concerns about new usage of the 32-bit unsafe methods being reintroduced, so at some point the old hook had to go. -- wli -- 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