On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 23:45 +0000, Hugh Dickins wrote: > > IE. update_mmu_cache() would be more generally useful if it took the > > ptep instead of the pte. Of course, I'm sure some embedded archs are > > going to cry for the added load here ... > > > > I like your idea. I'll look into doing a patch converting it and > will > > post it here. > > Well, I wasn't proposing > > update_mmu_cache(vma, address, ptep); > but > update_mmu_cache(vma, address, *ptep); > > which may not meet your future idea, but is much less churn for now > i.e. no change to any of the arch's update_mmu_cache(), > just a change to some of its callsites.
I see... but if we go that way, I think we may as well do the whole churn... I'll have a look at how bad it is. Cheers, Ben. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
