[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADnCVLwL0DK0Xa8FHhxCyqpJNU3Az=Xvdr3_MqA85ju_nUBZDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 20:36:33 +0800
From: sh liu <liush.damon@...il.com>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>
Cc: palmer@...ive.com, sorear2@...il.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
anup.patel@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rppt@...ux.ibm.com, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: redefine PTRS_PER_PGD/PTRS_PER_PMD/PTRS_PER_PTE
I think the previous description is unclear, and it is difficult for
readers to understand the meaning of these macros, because I never
understand. So I submitted this patch with reference to the definition
of arm. I think this way can make the reader easier to understand, and
I also think that this definition is more reasonable.
2019-06-29 2:52 GMT+08:00, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, damon wrote:
>
>> Use the number of addresses to define the relevant macros.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: damon <liush.damon@...il.com>
>
> This patch looks reasonable to me. But what's missing from the
> description is the motivation. Is this a prerequisite for another patch
> that you're planning to post? Or because you think this is clearer than
> the original? Or something else? etc.
>
>
> - Paul
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists