Re: [linuxsh-dev] Drop-In tree updates

[David W. <dw...@in...>]

rm...@te... said:
>  I _want_ per-arch definitions that optimize away the flushes that
> aren't needed!  Code should be written for the common denominator, and
> if arch X doesn't need Y, then it defines to nothing.

> I think that is what you want, too?

Absolutely. I just want them to have sensible names, that don't imply that 
they're actually going to flush the cache when they're not.

I'd rather have ifdefs than a flush_cache_page() which doesn't. But like you
and any other non-crack-smoking person, I'd rather have a sensibly named
routine which does the appropriate thing in each situation depending on the
caches of the CPU in question. 

> I just talked to Marcelo about merging into 2.4 ...

I saw.

--
dwmw2