From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 18:20:18 +0000 (GMT) From: Hugh Dickins Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Shared page tables In-Reply-To: <321DE6430A7C77745B5B8275@[10.1.1.4]> Message-ID: References: <6F40FCDC9FFDE7B6ACD294F5@[10.1.1.4]> <321DE6430A7C77745B5B8275@[10.1.1.4]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Dave McCracken Cc: Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel , Linux Memory Management List-ID: On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Dave McCracken wrote: > --On Tuesday, January 24, 2006 17:50:17 +0000 Hugh Dickins > wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Dave McCracken wrote: > > > >> I needed a function that returns a struct page for pgd and pud, defined > >> in each architecture. I decided the simplest way was to redefine > >> pgd_page and pud_page to match pmd_page and pte_page. Both functions > >> are pretty much used one place per architecture, so the change is > >> trivial. I could come up with new functions instead if you think it's > >> an issue. I do have a bit of a fetish about symmetry across levels :) > > > > Sounds to me like you made the right decision. > > I had a thought... would it be preferable for me to make this change as a > separate patch across all archictures in the name of consistency? Or Yes - but don't expect it to be taken if your shared pagetables aren't: just submit it as the first(ish) patch in your shared pagetables series. > should I continue to roll it into the shared pagetable patch as we enable > each architecture? Hugh -- 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