From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: struct page field arrangement Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 13:42:04 +0000 Message-ID: References: <45E6DA3F.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <45E6DA3F.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jan Beulich , Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 1/3/07 12:50, "Jan Beulich" wrote: > I didn't check what private is being used for - while it can't be used for > PageForeign's destructor pointer, perhaps netback could use that one > rather than index? Or, even more likely, netback could use mapping if > PageForeign was switched over to index (while mapping overlays ptl, that > is benign to netback as it's not dealing with pte pages). But of course, > this requires thorough auditing of other uses of index. Since PageForeign is only used for pagetables (for which you checked ->index should be okay) and for skbuff data (where we already use ->index in netback) then changing PageForeign to put the callback in ->index should be fine. -- Keir