From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: get_pteptr prototype From: Hollis Blanchard To: David Gibson Cc: paulus@samba.org, devel list In-Reply-To: <20030107005751.GP22215@zax.zax> References: <1041893967.1207.42.camel@granite.austin.ibm.com> <20030107005751.GP22215@zax.zax> Content-Type: text/plain Date: 08 Jan 2003 09:48:48 -0600 Message-Id: <1042040929.1021.80.camel@granite.austin.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 18:57, David Gibson wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 06, 2003 at 04:59:26PM -0600, Hollis Blanchard wrote: > > Hi, I think the prototype for get_pteptr should be moved to > > asm/pgtable.h . It currently is declared extern in mm/fault.c, and I > > will need it for platforms/ibm405lp_pm.c . > > > > Please apply to _2_4_devel and -2.5, and probably _2_4 for that matter. > > Hrm... what are you actually intending to use get_pteptr() for. I use it to acquire the PTE pointer for a page I need to mark writable (see the init function in http://penguinppc.org/~hollis/405LP-sleep.diff). It's sort of like CONFIG_XMON mapping the whole kernel writable, except I only need one page. If you know of a better way, please let me know! > There > are currently only two users, one of which needs to die (in 2.5, at > least). My experience has been that the concept of get_pteptr() is a > great deal less useful that one would, at first, think. It's simply a wrapper around successive pte/pmd/pgd_offset calls, with some error checking. Are you saying those calls are not the correct way to get the PTE pointer for an address? -Hollis -- PowerPC Linux IBM Linux Technology Center ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/