Re: [PATCH 0/15] ptwalk: pagetable walker cleanup

2005-03-09 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 22:05 +, Hugh Dickins wrote: > Here's a cleanup of the pagetable walkers, in common and i386 code, > based on 2.6.11-bk5. Mainly to make them all go the same simpler way, > so they're easier to follow with less room for error; but also to reduce > the code size and speed

Re: [PATCH 0/15] ptwalk: pagetable walker cleanup

2005-03-09 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 17:02 -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 11:39:44 +1100 > Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There are some other bugs introduced by set_pte_at() caused by latent > > bugs in the PTE walkers that 'drop' part of the address along the way,

Re: [PATCH 0/15] ptwalk: pagetable walker cleanup

2005-03-09 Thread David S. Miller
On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 11:39:44 +1100 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are some other bugs introduced by set_pte_at() caused by latent > bugs in the PTE walkers that 'drop' part of the address along the way, > notably the vmalloc.c ones are bogus, thus breaking ppc/ppc64 in s

[PATCH 0/15] ptwalk: pagetable walker cleanup

2005-03-09 Thread Hugh Dickins
Here's a cleanup of the pagetable walkers, in common and i386 code, based on 2.6.11-bk5. Mainly to make them all go the same simpler way, so they're easier to follow with less room for error; but also to reduce the code size and speed it up a little. These are janitorial changes, other arches may