On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 03:56:35AM +0300, Hiroshi DOYU wrote: > Would it be possible to have "pmd_table()" definition "in pgtable.h"? Well, the first question is... where has this come from, and why. Looking at the omap tree, it's because of arch/arm/plat-omap/mmu.c, which seems to be somewhat weird and complex, duplicating some of what's going on elsewhere in the kernel. (And with the changes I've just queued up for the next mainline merge window, this file will probably break because of it's use of the kernel page table macros.) A more portable way to do that would be to split out the innards of __arm_ioremap_pfn() into a separate function, and use that instead of exmap_set_armmmu(). Then, replace exmap_clear_armmmu() with unmap_area_sections() to tear down the ARM side of the mapping. As far as 'mmu->twl_mm' goes, the only reason I can see for that existing is as a way to use the kernel's page table accessors to manipulate something that isn't used for as the CPU's page table, which in turn leads to quite a number of nasty hacks in the code. Really that wants to use its own accessors and macros, and twl_mm eliminated. A mm_struct isn't small. And by doing so, you'll avoid the bug and memory leak in omap_mmu_register(). kfree'ing (!) a mm_struct onto a different slab cache from whence it came! Which probably will mean that there ends up only being one place where the construct which pmd_table() is replacing exists. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
