[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <57CFA1A1.7060704@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 10:42:01 +0530
From: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org
CC: linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] mm: cleanup pfn_t usage in track_pfn_insert()
On 09/06/2016 10:19 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> Now that track_pfn_insert() is no longer used in the DAX path, it no
> longer needs to comprehend pfn_t values.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/mm/pat.c | 4 ++--
> include/asm-generic/pgtable.h | 4 ++--
> mm/memory.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
A small nit. Should not the arch/x86/mm/pat.c changes be separated out
into a different patch ? Kind of faced little bit problem separating out
generic core mm changes to that of arch specific mm changes when going
through the commits in retrospect.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists