Re: [patch-2.4.0-test11-pre1] broken comment around paging_init()

On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote: > The comment above arch/i386/mm/init.c:paging_init() lies shamelessly -- we correction -- it doesn't lie since [0,4M] \subset [0,8M] -- it just doesn't tell the human everything he ma

[patch-2.4.0-test11-pre1] broken comment around paging_init()

Hi Linus, The comment above arch/i386/mm/init.c:paging_init() lies shamelessly -- we set up two page tables in head.S which cover 0-8M and not 0-4M. Also, the actual loop in head.S which does the job uses labels pg0 and empty_zero_page so the pointer to the second page table (pg1) is redundant.