On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 06:14:31PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > On Mon, Jun 02, 2008 at 04:58:47PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Thu, 29 May 2008 22:20:51 +1000 > > npiggin@xxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > Implement the pte_special bit for x86. This is required to support lockless > > > get_user_pages, because we need to know whether or not we can refcount a > > > particular page given only its pte (and no vma). > > > > Spits this reject: > > > > *************** > > *** 39,44 **** > > #define _PAGE_UNUSED3 (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_UNUSED3) > > #define _PAGE_PAT (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_PAT) > > #define _PAGE_PAT_LARGE (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_PAT_LARGE) > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) || defined(CONFIG_X86_PAE) > > #define _PAGE_NX (_AC(1, ULL) << _PAGE_BIT_NX) > > --- 40,47 ---- > > #define _PAGE_UNUSED3 (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_UNUSED3) > > #define _PAGE_PAT (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_PAT) > > #define _PAGE_PAT_LARGE (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_PAT_LARGE) > > + #define _PAGE_SPECIAL (_AC(1, L)<<_PAGE_BIT_SPECIAL) > > + #define __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SPECIAL > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_X86_64) || defined(CONFIG_X86_PAE) > > #define _PAGE_NX (_AC(1, ULL) << _PAGE_BIT_NX) > > > > Which I fixed thusly: > > > > #define _PAGE_PAT (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PAT) > > #define _PAGE_PAT_LARGE (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_PAT_LARGE) > > #define _PAGE_SPECIAL (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << _PAGE_BIT_SPECIAL) > > #define __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SPECIAL > > > > > > OK? > > > > > > (Also please check the bunch of checkpatch fixes, a warning fix and a > > compile fix). > > That looks a sane merge to me. I had a quick look over the various > fixes and they all look fine to me. That means we can put your reviewed-by: back? ;) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
