Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-07 Thread Zachary Amsden
Andrew Morton wrote: Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yeah, I said ugly ones specificly. There's been some nice previous ones, >but most in this series (all the move of stuff to subarches) are rather >horrible and lack lots of explanation. > > All of my previous

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-07 Thread Zachary Amsden
Andrew Morton wrote: Zachary Amsden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, I said ugly ones specificly. There's been some nice previous ones, but most in this series (all the move of stuff to subarches) are rather horrible and lack lots of explanation. All of my previous patches have

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Chris Wright
* Zachary Amsden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > All operations which update live page table entries have been moved to the > sub-architecture layer. Unfortunately, this required yet another parallel set > of pgtable-Nlevel-ops.h files, but this avoids the ugliness of having to use > #ifdef's all of

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Chris Wright
* Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Yup, with one or two semi-exceptions, all the patches up to this series > seem to be good general cleanups - certainly it's good to move all those > open-coded asm statements into single-site inlines and macros: people keep > on screwing them up. I

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Andrew Morton
Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Yeah, I said ugly ones specificly. There's been some nice previous ones, > >but most in this series (all the move of stuff to subarches) are rather > >horrible and lack lots of explanation. > > > > > > All of my previous patches have been

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Zachary Amsden
Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:58:36PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: I think that patch is really ugly - it makes hacking VM on i386 even more painful than it already is because the convolutes the file structure even more. Hope it is not applied. Especially as

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:58:36PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > I think that patch is really ugly - it makes hacking VM on i386 > > > even more painful than it already is because the convolutes the file > > > structure even more. Hope it is not applied. > > > > Especially as there's been no

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Andi Kleen
> > I think that patch is really ugly - it makes hacking VM on i386 > > even more painful than it already is because the convolutes the file > > structure even more. Hope it is not applied. > > Especially as there's been no user shown for it, similar to all the other > ugly patches from vmware.

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > i386 Transparent paravirtualization sub-arch patch #8. > > > > Transparent paravirtualization support for MMU operations. > > > > All operations which update live page table entries

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Andi Kleen
Zachary Amsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i386 Transparent paravirtualization sub-arch patch #8. > > Transparent paravirtualization support for MMU operations. > > All operations which update live page table entries have been moved to the > sub-architecture layer. Unfortunately, this

[PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Zachary Amsden
i386 Transparent paravirtualization sub-arch patch #8. Transparent paravirtualization support for MMU operations. All operations which update live page table entries have been moved to the sub-architecture layer. Unfortunately, this required yet another parallel set of pgtable-Nlevel-ops.h

[PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Zachary Amsden
i386 Transparent paravirtualization sub-arch patch #8. Transparent paravirtualization support for MMU operations. All operations which update live page table entries have been moved to the sub-architecture layer. Unfortunately, this required yet another parallel set of pgtable-Nlevel-ops.h

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Andi Kleen
Zachary Amsden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: i386 Transparent paravirtualization sub-arch patch #8. Transparent paravirtualization support for MMU operations. All operations which update live page table entries have been moved to the sub-architecture layer. Unfortunately, this required yet

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:37:31PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: Zachary Amsden [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: i386 Transparent paravirtualization sub-arch patch #8. Transparent paravirtualization support for MMU operations. All operations which update live page table entries have been moved

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Andi Kleen
I think that patch is really ugly - it makes hacking VM on i386 even more painful than it already is because the convolutes the file structure even more. Hope it is not applied. Especially as there's been no user shown for it, similar to all the other ugly patches from vmware. Well,

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:58:36PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: I think that patch is really ugly - it makes hacking VM on i386 even more painful than it already is because the convolutes the file structure even more. Hope it is not applied. Especially as there's been no user shown for

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Zachary Amsden
Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 01:58:36PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: I think that patch is really ugly - it makes hacking VM on i386 even more painful than it already is because the convolutes the file structure even more. Hope it is not applied. Especially as

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Andrew Morton
Zachary Amsden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, I said ugly ones specificly. There's been some nice previous ones, but most in this series (all the move of stuff to subarches) are rather horrible and lack lots of explanation. All of my previous patches have been aimed at fixing

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Chris Wright
* Andrew Morton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Yup, with one or two semi-exceptions, all the patches up to this series seem to be good general cleanups - certainly it's good to move all those open-coded asm statements into single-site inlines and macros: people keep on screwing them up. I agree.

Re: [PATCH] 8/8 Create MMU 2/3 level accessors in the sub-arch layer (i386)

2005-08-06 Thread Chris Wright
* Zachary Amsden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: All operations which update live page table entries have been moved to the sub-architecture layer. Unfortunately, this required yet another parallel set of pgtable-Nlevel-ops.h files, but this avoids the ugliness of having to use #ifdef's all of the