[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100111101543.GD13886@linux-mips.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:15:43 +0100
From: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Darren Hart <dvhltc@...ibm.com>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips,mm: Reinstate move_pte optimization
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 03:32:57PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > to include/linux/mm.h - I'd prefer to keep it private if we can.
> > But for completeness, this would involve resurrecting the 2.6.19
> > MIPS move_pte(), which makes sure mremap() move doesn't interfere
> > with our assumptions. Something like
> >
> > #define __HAVE_ARCH_MOVE_PTE
> > pte_t move_pte(pte_t pte, pgprot_t prot, unsigned long old_addr,
> > unsigned long new_addr)
> > {
> > if (pte_present(pte) && is_zero_pfn(pte_pfn(pte)))
> > pte = mk_pte(ZERO_PAGE(new_addr), prot);
> > return pte;
> > }
> >
> > in arch/mips/include/asm/pgtable.h.
>
> I agree with resurrecting mips move_pte. At least your patch
> passed my cross compile test :)
>
> Ralf, can you please review following patch?
Looks good.
Acked-by: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Thanks,
Ralf
--
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