From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: shm_alloc and friends Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 16:59:40 +0100 (BST) In-Reply-To: <200005251520.QAA02278@raistlin.arm.linux.org.uk> from "Russell King" at May 25, 2000 04:20:10 PM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Russell King Cc: Alan Cox , riel@nl.linux.org, linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: > > Use pte_clear. That is the only valid way to do it. Im not sure I follow why > > you cant use pte_clear in this case > > pte_clear has other side effects on ARM, since we don't have enough bits in the > page tables to store all the bits that Linux needs. In fact, there are NO bits > in the page table entries which are not CPU defined. How about adding a seperate pte_init() then ? > Therefore, really SHM's use of pte_clear is a hack in the extreme, breaking the > architecture independence of the page table macros. Agreed. -- 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.eu.org/Linux-MM/