Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Feb 2005 11:58:42 +0000 (GMT) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] page table iterators |
| |
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005, Nick Piggin wrote: > > pud_addr_end?
next = pud_addr_end(addr, end);
Hmm, yes, I'll go with that, thanks (unless a better idea follows).
Something I do intend on top of what I sent before, is another set of three macros, like
if (pud_none_or_clear_bad(pud)) continue;
to replace all the p??_none, p??_bad clauses: not to save space, but just for clarity, those loops now seeming dominated by the unlikeliest of cases.
Has anyone _ever_ seen a p??_ERROR message? I'm inclined to just put three functions into mm/memory.c to do the p??_ERROR and p??_clear, but that way the __FILE__ and __LINE__ will always come out the same. I think if it ever proves a problem, we'd just add in a dump_stack.
Hugh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |