Does this make sense for !HIGHPTE? In fact does it make sense to
carry along HIGHPTE as an option still? ..
> +#ifndef CONFIG_HIGHPMD /* Oh boy. Error reporting is going to blow major goats. */
Any chance you can rearragne the code to avoid the ifndef in favour
of an ifdef?
> set_pte(dst_pte, entry);
> + pmd_unmap(dst_pte);
> + pmd_unmap_nested(src_pte);
<Lots more pmd_unmap* calls snipped>
Looks like you changed some API so that pmds are now returned mapped?
It might make sense to change their names into foo_map then so the
breakage is at the API level if someone misses updates for the changes.
> +#ifdef CONFIG_HIGHPMD
> +#define GFP_PMD (__GFP_REPEAT|__GFP_HIGHMEM|GFP_KERNEL)
> +#else
> +#define GFP_PMD (__GFP_REPEAT|GFP_KERNEL)
> +#endif
So what? Do you want to use a space or tab after the #define? :)
Also Given that GFP_PMD is used just once it's argueable whether it makes
sense to get rid of the defintion and use the expanded values directly.
Otherwise the patch looks fine to me and should allow to get some more
free lowmem on those insanely big 32bit machines.. :)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/