From: Miklos S. <mi...@sz...> - 2006-04-02 08:45:56
|
> On Sat, 2006-04-01 at 18:51 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > BTW, these seem to be needed for ARM too. Do you have any idea who I > > should bug about this? The MAINTAINERS file is far from clear on this > > point. > > Erm, not just arm. The anon page problem looks like it might afflict > other incoherent architectures (like sparc and ppc); it just depends > whether their flush_dcache_page() accidentally flushes anonymous pages > or not. Hmm, seems like they do. I'm confused. What was the exact reason for having a separate function for anon pages? Wouldn't unifying the functionality of flush_dcache_page() and flush_anon_page() make more sense? Otherwise sparc and ppc would have to check PageAnon() from both flush_dcache_page() and flush_anon_page() and call a common function, which seems to just complicate things without any gain. Miklos |