From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Tue, 24 May 2011 09:26:12 +0300 Subject: [PATCH v5 15/19] ARM: LPAE: Add support for cpu_v7_do_(suspend|resume) In-Reply-To: References: <1304859098-10760-1-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <1304859098-10760-16-git-send-email-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <20110518072737.GC6815@atomide.com> <1305897667.2788.98.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Message-ID: <20110524062611.GA30799@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, Sorry for the delay in replying, we got a baby girl last Thursday :) * Catalin Marinas [110523 00:05]: > On 20 May 2011 19:09, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Fri, 20 May 2011, Catalin Marinas wrote: > >> On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 08:27 +0100, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >> > Do we really need all this ifdef else throughout this series? > >> > > >> > I think we already have things in place to do this dynamically > >> > like we already do for thumb, smp_on_up, v6 vs v7 and so on. > >> > >> By dynamically, do you mean at run-time? We won't be able to compile > >> both classic and LPAE in the same kernel, there is just too much > >> difference between them (2 vs 3 levels of page tables - LPAE is an > >> entirely new format). OK > >> If you mean some simpler macros like what we have for ARM/THUMB to > >> reduce the number of lines, I'm fine with it though we don't always have > >> a 1:1 mapping between LPAE and non-LPAE instructions. > >> > >> Alternatively, I'm happy to create a separate proc-v7lpae.S file. > > > > That would probably be the best option. > > OK, I'll move this code to a separate file. The v7 setup code got > pretty hard to read. Separate file or macros sounds good to me too depending on how much of existing code you can recycle. Regards, Tony