[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5726A7D5.7030305@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2016 11:05:25 +1000
From: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
To: Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, criu@...nvz.org,
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/5] powerpc: Rename context.vdso_base to context.vdso
On 29/04/16 01:18, Christopher Covington wrote:
> In order to share remap and unmap support for the VDSO with other
> architectures without duplicating the code, we need a common name and type
> for the address of the VDSO. An informal survey of the architectures
> indicates unsigned long vdso is popular. Change the variable name in
> powerpc from mm->context.vdso_base to simply mm->context.vdso.
>
Could you please provide additional details on why the remap/unmap operations are required?
This patch does rename, but should it abstract via a function acesss to vmap field using arch_* operations? Not sure
Balbir Singh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists