On Wednesday 31 March 2010 13:11:24 David Howells wrote: > How about the attached patch instead? I'd rather not make vmap() generally > available in NOMMU mode since it can't be implemented in NOMMU mode. Yes, > vmap() can take a copy of the pages it is given, but you can't guarantee > that's the right thing to do. It's like a shared-writable mmap. > > Instead, why not just override vmap() in firmware_class.c for the one > instance where we know we're happy with this behaviour?
how about putting this implementation into like vmap_nommu() and only rewriting vmap() to vmap_nommu() when we know it's safe ? such as this firmware case ? -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ uClinux-dev mailing list uClinux-dev@uclinux.org http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org To unsubscribe see: http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
