Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262019AbUKBWMG (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2004 17:12:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262022AbUKBWME (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2004 17:12:04 -0500 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:57489 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262224AbUKBWLO (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2004 17:11:14 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 14:10:35 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Nathan Lynch cc: Andrew Morton , Paul Mackerras , Anton Blanchard , lkml , Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH] PPC64 mmu_context_init needs to run earlier In-Reply-To: <1099432625.23845.93.camel@pants.austin.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <16775.5912.788675.644838@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20041101221336.5f6d8534.akpm@osdl.org> <1099432625.23845.93.camel@pants.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 995 Lines: 33 On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, Nathan Lynch wrote: > > Using idr_get_new_above in init_new_context lets us get rid of an > awkward init function which wasn't running early enough in boot > anyway. Ok, call me stupid, but what's the difference between idr_get_new(&mmu_context_idr, NULL, &index); and idr_get_new_above(&mmu_context_idr, NULL, 0, &index); because as far as I can tell, they are exactly the same. They both just do a "idr_get_new_above_int(idp, ptr, 0)". So I don't see why one would need an awkward init function, and the other wouldn't.. That said, maybe the problem is that we shouldn't even get far enough into the fork() logic to ever get into a new MMU context if driver_init ends up being called before we're ready. Linus - 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/