From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: bill4carson@gmail.com (bill4carson)
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2012 08:35:36 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/7] Add various hugetlb arm high level hooks
In-Reply-To: <20120229153814.GK17745@arm.com>
References: <1329126268-11032-1-git-send-email-bill4carson@gmail.com>
 <1329126268-11032-2-git-send-email-bill4carson@gmail.com>
 <20120229103207.GB17745@arm.com> <4F4E0BDE.6040708@gmail.com>
 <20120229153814.GK17745@arm.com>
Message-ID: <4F57FED8.7050708@gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org



On 2012?02?29? 23:38, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:28:30AM +0000, bill4carson wrote:
>> On 2012?02?29? 18:32, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 09:44:22AM +0000, Bill Carson wrote:
>>>> +static inline void huge_ptep_set_wrprotect(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>>> +					   unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	pte_t old_pte = *ptep;
>>>> +	set_huge_pte_at(mm, addr, ptep, pte_wrprotect(old_pte));
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> You could use the generic ptep_set_wrprotect()
>>
>> I'm a bit of confused about this.
>>
>> generic ptep_set_wrprotect() can not set huge pte, that's why
>> set_huge_pte_at is used instead here.
>
> Ah, the generic one can only work with with LPAE where set_huge_pte_at()
> is just a set_pte_at(). So this part looks good.
>
Hi, Catalin

Thanks for your time to review PATCH1/7 :)

I'm wondering if reset of this patch set is ok,
I would like to start working on V3 as per your comments.



-- 
I am a slow learner
but I will keep trying to fight for my dreams!

--bill