On 22 Mar 2006, at 14:33, Keir Fraser wrote: > Okay, can you suggest a better one? That's the best I could come up > with that wasn't long winded. How about apply_to_page_range()? > >> secondly, I think you confuse our (confusing) terminology: the page >> that holds pte_ts is not the pte_page, the pte_page is the page that >> a pte points to > > What should we call it? Essentially we want to be able to get the > physical address of a PTE in some cases, and passing struct page > pointer seemed the best way to be able to derive that. I can rename it > to something else vaguely plausible if the only problem is the > semantic clash with Linux's idiomatic use of pte_page. Looks like pmd_page is correct? -- Keir
