From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261210AbULEAlz (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:41:55 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261212AbULEAlz (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:41:55 -0500 Received: from mail-relay-1.tiscali.it ([213.205.33.41]:56758 "EHLO mail-relay-1.tiscali.it") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261210AbULEAlw (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2004 19:41:52 -0500 Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2004 01:40:49 +0100 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Ian Pratt Cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven.Hand@cl.cam.ac.uk, Christian.Limpach@cl.cam.ac.uk, Keir.Fraser@cl.cam.ac.uk, "David S. Miller" , William Lee Irwin III Subject: Re: [4/7] Xen VMM patch set : /dev/mem io_remap_page_range for CONFIG_XEN Message-ID: <20041205004049.GF13244@dualathlon.random> References: <20041130180337.GT4365@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 13D9 8355 295F 4823 7C49 C012 DFA1 686E 68B9 CB43 X-PGP-Key: 1024R/CB4660B9 CC A0 71 81 F4 A0 63 AC C0 4B 81 1D 8C 15 C8 E5 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 11:49:32PM +0000, Ian Pratt wrote: > So, do we think the best /dev/mem patch is to change the call to > io_remap_page_range, and have a #ifdef for the SPARC case until > the number of arguments gets unified? Yes from my part ;). It looks more correct than calling io_remap_page_range under an #ifdef CONFIG_XEN. One thing I don't know is why for example sparc isn't already doing that (like XEN is already doing that with your patch). Sparc and XEN are the only two archs where io_remap_page_range isn't an alias to remap_pfn/page_range. It's much nicer if we use io_remap_page_range in the same places for both sparc and XEN. Though to get the final answer we should ask the sparc folks.