[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1228500936.3255.210.camel@calx>
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:15:36 -0600
From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
To: Hugh Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] shmem: unify regular and tiny shmem
On Fri, 2008-12-05 at 13:18 +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> I agree with where you're going (surrendering your empire to mine!
> or perhaps you don't you see it quite that way?), but I think this
> isn't quite the patch you meant to send: it shouldn't contain that
>
> > - &shmem_file_operations);
> > + &shmem_file_operations);
> > +
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_MMU
> > + error = ramfs_nommu_expand_for_mapping(inode, size);
> > + if (error)
> > + goto close_file;
> > +#endif
>
> hunk in mm/shmem.c
I'm staring at the source and I'm at a loss as to why not? SHMEM depends
on MMU, so this only gets done when !SHMEM && !MMU, which makes it the
same as the tiny-shmem.c code it's unifying, no?
> and it should be deleting mm/tiny-shmem.c?
Not sure how that bit fell off, yes.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists