From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263121AbVG3TMz (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jul 2005 15:12:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263117AbVG3TFi (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jul 2005 15:05:38 -0400 Received: from smtp001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com ([217.12.11.32]:39845 "HELO smtp001.mail.ukl.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S263110AbVG3TEu (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jul 2005 15:04:50 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.it; h=Received:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=sC+p5OMbMiHZVrAg1xnogYG6j+k43TbZueAkT23fbFhE9tbBRpdea24lMpADf6JiDiUk/aCCWulbxenwGfQGok4luE5Gccf+N/LJRcigyJ4TeBt23Pc9ID3BTSYXSaVJwu+AeCD71M477UpOny+DwDCjsYH0gA8SRaDN4mOp/To= ; From: Blaisorblade To: Jeff Dike Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] uml: share page bits handling between 2 and 3 level pagetables Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2005 20:54:16 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.2 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20050728185655.9C6ADA3@zion.home.lan> <20050730160218.GB4585@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> In-Reply-To: <20050730160218.GB4585@ccure.user-mode-linux.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200507302054.17118.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Saturday 30 July 2005 18:02, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 08:56:53PM +0200, blaisorblade@yahoo.it wrote: > > As obvious, a "core code nice cleanup" is not a "stability-friendly > > patch" so usual care applies. > > These look reasonable, as they are what we discussed in Ottawa. > > I'll put them in my tree and see if I see any problems. I would > suggest sending these in early after 2.6.13 if they seem OK. Excluding the accessed handling it's ok, for the accessed handling I'm doubtful. Could you check if this was introduced recently (for instance by the introduction of flush_range_common, which IIRC is recent) or if it's old? For instance, in latest 2.4, and/or in 2.6.9. If this is a regression the fix for accessed handling can be merged too. -- Inform me of my mistakes, so I can keep imitating Homer Simpson's "Doh!". Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade (Skype ID "PaoloGiarrusso", ICQ 215621894) http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it