Re: [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd_bad()

>>> Hugh Dickins <[email protected]> 15.11.06 18:01 >>>
>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>> Make pmd_bad() symmetrical to pgd_bad() and pud_bad(). At once,
>> simplify them all.
>
>Symmetrical and simpler, yes, but you're weakening the pmd_bad() test:
>no longer requires that all those _KERNPG_TABLE bits be set.  Wouldn't
>it be better to go the other way and strengthen pgd_bad, pud_bad?

Maybe, but there must have been a reason for not doing so. It could
certainly be a follow-up patch - if it works.

Jan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd_bad()
    • From: "Jan Beulich" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd_bad()
    • From: Hugh Dickins <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 05/19] NFS: Use local caching
• Next by Date: CPUFREQ does not get enabled
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd_bad()
• Next by thread: Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH] x86-64: adjust pmd_bad()
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]