Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 15 Nov 2008 09:28:37 +0000 (GMT) | From | Hugh Dickins <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: implement remap_pfn_range with apply_to_page_range |
| |
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Nick Piggin wrote: > > No, adding a cycle here or an indirect function call there IMO is > > not acceptable in core mm/ code without a good reason. > > <shrug> OK.
I'm with Nick on this: admittedly remap_pfn_range() is a borderline case (since it has no latency breaks at present), but it is a core mm function, and I'd prefer we leave it as is unless good reason.
So, no hurry, but I'd prefer
mm-implement-remap_pfn_range-with-apply_to_page_range.patch mm-remap_pfn_range-restore-missing-flush.patch
to be removed from mmotm - and don't I deserve that, just for actually reading the mm-commits boilerplate ;-?
Hugh
| |