From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267429AbUBSRfd (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 12:35:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267433AbUBSRfd (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 12:35:33 -0500 Received: from gprs157-229.eurotel.cz ([160.218.157.229]:51584 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267429AbUBSRf3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2004 12:35:29 -0500 Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:35:14 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Michael Frank Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Nigel Cunningham , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Reserved page flaging of 2.4 kernel memory changed recently? Message-ID: <20040219173514.GD259@elf.ucw.cz> References: <200402050941.34155.mhf@linuxmail.org> <20040208020624.GG31926@dualathlon.random> <200402100625.41288.mhf@linuxmail.org> <20040219072629.GB467@openzaurus.ucw.cz> <20040219161455.GC259@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi! > >That means that PG_nosave | PG_reserved indeed is "PG_donttouch", but > >PG_nosave has slightly different meaning. > > Makes sense, but PG_reserved is used to keep VM out of these pages. > > Can we have a seperate bit PG_donttouch which is set with PG_nosave > | PG_reserved in reserved/video/BIOS/Broken CPU areas? Why? I do not see what is wrong with 2 separate flags... In fact, you might want to #define PG_donttouch (PG_reserved | PG_nosave) and (modulo atomic macros etc), it would work for everyone... Pavel -- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?]