> > +#define overlaps(as, ae, bs, be) ((ae) >= (bs) && (as) <= (be))Which one do you prefer? (to be honest the current one is "intuitive" to me) It is -- there are BUG_ONs for this in __clear_kernel_mapping It is enforced in the callers (actually there is only a single caller -- the GART code ) by not calling it overlapping for the kernel itself. Given that could be checked too, but that would be probably overkill for an internal function. Ok. Hmm I can add one, but if that happens the caller is likely seriously confused and will likely cause other problems anyways. I don't think it can happen for the GART code which is currently the only caller. Hmm true -- that will only affect relocatable kernels, but for those it's wrong. Given that the patch was supposed to fix a case that only happens relocatable kernels that's quite ironic :) Actually thinking about it again you can just drop it for now. It is orthogonal to gbpages. I think I added it to the series when I was planning to do kernel mapping as GB pages, but that turned out to be a bad idea anyways. Thanks for the review, -Andi --
| Thomas Gleixner | Re: Linux 2.6.21-rc1 |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| James Bottomley | [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Fixing the Kernel Janitors project |
| James Morris | Re: LSM conversion to static interface |
git: | |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
| Christoph Hellwig | Re: [PATCH 06/32] IGET: Mark iget() and read_inode() as being obsolete [try #2] |
| Linus Torvalds | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH take 2] pkt_sched: Protect gen estimators under est_lock. |
