Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:29:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:29:14 -0500 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:61866 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:29:13 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 06:26:08 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20021028.062608.78045801.davem@redhat.com> To: willy@debian.org Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, hugh@veritas.com, akpm@zip.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] shmem missing cache flush From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20021028143226.N27461@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <1035216742.27318.189.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20021028.061059.38206858.davem@redhat.com> <20021028143226.N27461@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> X-FalunGong: Information control. X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1474 Lines: 39 From: Matthew Wilcox Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 14:32:26 +0000 s/well maintained port/port that linus takes patches from regularly/ If you can't get purely arch/* include/asm-* patches to him, that isn't my problem. Yes, you might have to retransmit that patch 20/30 times over the course of a few days depending upon how busy Linus is, just get over it. :-) What do you want to do about flush_icache_page? You want to change it to flush_dcache_page at eviction time, and then we can purge that page from our icache in update_mmu_cache? That's the idea. The other idea is "well these particular call spots really are special, so let's document flush_icache_page properly". You may as well drop this hunk from the diff; our current tree doesn't even have these functions; just: static inline void flush_page_to_ram(struct page *page) { } I gave Alan a patch that applies to 2.5.44 as-is, that is the most useful form of the patch. If you code is different now, you or Alan can deal with the conflict once it does arrise and your "other code" is in 2.5.x. For now it isn't so it doesn't make any sense for me to patch against something that isn't there :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/