[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2a558ec8-c46c-299e-2f14-bb33058cbd90@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2018 12:56:52 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
davem@...emloft.net
Cc: kstewart@...uxfoundation.org, pombredanne@...b.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, anthony.yznaga@...cle.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
Khalid Aziz <khalid@...ehiking.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 09/11] mm: Allow arch code to override copy_highpage()
On 03/05/2018 12:42 PM, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> On 03/05/2018 12:24 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 02/21/2018 09:15 AM, Khalid Aziz wrote:
>>> +#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_COPY_HIGHPAGE
>>> +
>>> static inline void copy_highpage(struct page *to, struct page *from)
>>> {
>>> char *vfrom, *vto;
>>> @@ -248,4 +250,6 @@ static inline void copy_highpage(struct page *to,
>>> struct page *from)
>>> kunmap_atomic(vfrom);
>>> }
>>> +#endif
>>
>> I think we prefer that these are CONFIG_* options.
>
> I added this mechanism to be same as what we have for copy_user_highpage():
>
> ---------------
> #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_COPY_USER_HIGHPAGE
I think that's the old way that we generally don't want to add new
instances of.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists