From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261241AbVBQXXt (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2005 18:23:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261239AbVBQXWo (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2005 18:22:44 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:44457 "EHLO gate.crashing.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261242AbVBQXWY (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Feb 2005 18:22:24 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] page table iterators From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Andi Kleen Cc: Nick Piggin , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <20050217230342.GA3115@wotan.suse.de> References: <4214A1EC.4070102@yahoo.com.au> <4214A437.8050900@yahoo.com.au> <20050217194336.GA8314@wotan.suse.de> <1108680578.5665.14.camel@gaston> <20050217230342.GA3115@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:21:03 +1100 Message-Id: <1108682463.28873.1.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2005-02-18 at 00:03 +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > And to be honest we only have about 6 or 7 of these walkers > in the whole kernel. And 90% of them are in memory.c > While doing 4level I think I changed all of them around several > times and it wasn't that big an issue. So it's not that we > have a big pressing problem here... We have about 50% of them in memory.c :) But my main problem is more that every single of them is implemented slightly differently. Going Nick's way is a good start. If they are all consolidated to use the same macro, they will be easier for you to change later on anyway. Ben.