From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: unify pmd_free() implementation Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:46:24 -0700 Message-ID: <488E3020.1040701@goop.org> References: <488DF119.2000004@gmail.com> <20080729012656.566F.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com> <488DFFB0.1090107@gmail.com> <20080728133030.8b29fa5a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from gw.goop.org ([64.81.55.164]:48281 "EHLO mail.goop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751375AbYG1Uq3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:46:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080728133030.8b29fa5a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: righi.andrea@gmail.com, 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 Andrew Morton wrote: > 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. Its immediate neighbours should be easy enough (pmd_alloc_one, __pmd_free_tlb), but any of the ones involving pmd_t risk #include hell (though the earlier references to pud_t in inline functions suggest it will work). And pmd_addr_end is just ugly. J