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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans