Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm: implement remap_pfn_range with apply_to_page_range

[Hugh Dickins]

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