linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: flush_anon_page for MIPS

To: "David Daney" <ddaney@avtrex.com>, "Ralf Baechle" <ralf@linux-mips.org>
Subject: RE: flush_anon_page for MIPS
From: "Ravi Pratap" <Ravi.Pratap@hillcrestlabs.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 09:33:10 -0400
Cc: "Atsushi Nemoto" <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>, <miklos@szeredi.hu>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
In-reply-to: <46046AC9.5070306@avtrex.com>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
Thread-index: Acdtp9aVE1C2IAk4QHOfbmMCsG0W+ACAwYBQ
Thread-topic: flush_anon_page for MIPS
> From: David Daney [mailto:ddaney@avtrex.com] 
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 8:03 PM
> To: Ralf Baechle
> Cc: Ravi Pratap; Atsushi Nemoto; miklos@szeredi.hu; 
> linux-mips@linux-mips.org
> Subject: Re: flush_anon_page for MIPS
> 
> Ralf Baechle wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:17:25PM -0400, Ravi Pratap wrote:
> > 
> >>> Yes, that's perfectly reproducable here (running a VSMP 
> kernel on a 
> >>> 34K).
> >>> So the fix I posted earlier was good but I did a few tweaks to it 
> >>> anyway.
> >>> Will commit to all 2.6 -stable branch and master later.
> >>
> >> Thanks so much! Will this go into 2.6.15 by any chance?
> > 
> > I don't recall that there every has been such a kernel release ;-)
> > 
> > But seriously, 2.6.15 is as dead as Tutankhamun.
> 
> Some chip vendors only support that version, so I am assuming 
> that that was the reason for the question.

That's correct, actually :-)

> It is a classic case of what happens when people do ports 
> that are not merged.  They say it is good enough as is and 
> then never move forward or fix bugs.

True, and I don't know why these vendors do it. I wish too that they
didn't.


> The good news I guess is that we have the source, so we could 
> forward port it if we were really motivated.

Yes, but isn't it a lot of work considering the lack of a
flush_anon_page in 2.6.15?


Ravi.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>