From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Sun, 22 May 2011 22:09:47 +0100 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: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org 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). >> >> 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. -- Catalin