lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Feb]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:10    [W:0.026 / U:1.240 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site