From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:30:30 -0700 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: unify pmd_free() implementation Message-Id: <20080728133030.8b29fa5a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <488DFFB0.1090107@gmail.com> References: <488DF119.2000004@gmail.com> <20080729012656.566F.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <488DFFB0.1090107@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: righi.andrea@gmail.com Cc: kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner List-ID: On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 19:19:44 +0200 Andrea Righi wrote: > KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > >> yep! clear. > >> > >> Ok, in this case wouldn't be better at least to define pud_free() as: > >> > >> static inline pud_free(struct mm_struct *mm, pmd_t *pmd) > >> { > >> } > > > > I also like this :) > > ok, a simpler patch using the inline function will follow. > I can second that. See http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/include-asm-generic-pgtable-nopmdh-macros-are-noxious-reason-435.patch Ingo cruelly ignored it. Probably he's used to ignoring the comit storm which I send in his direction - I'll need to resend it sometime. I'd consider that patch to be partial - we should demacroize the surrounding similar functions too. But that will require a bit more testing. -- 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