From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 25 12:03:51 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4078B16A4BF; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:03:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (209-128-86-226.bayarea.net [209.128.86.226]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 736DD43FBD; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:03:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@xcllnt.net) Received: from ns1.xcllnt.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7PJ3owO019053; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:03:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel@ns1.xcllnt.net) Received: (from marcel@localhost) by ns1.xcllnt.net (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7PJ3oOU019052; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:03:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marcel) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:03:50 -0700 From: Marcel Moolenaar To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20030825190349.GC18841@ns1.xcllnt.net> References: <200308230624.h7N6O0bq088622@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/vm vm_page.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:03:51 -0000 On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 01:38:36PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > On 23-Aug-2003 Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > marcel 2003/08/22 23:24:00 PDT > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > Modified files: > > sys/vm vm_page.h > > Log: > > Add support for 16K and 32K page sizes. The valid and dirty maps > > in struct vm_page are defined as u_int for 16K pages and u_long > > for 32K pages, with the implied assumption that long will at least > > be 64 bits wide on platforms where we support 32K pages. > > Why not use 'uint32_t' and 'uint64_t' to remove the assumption? I thought about that but decided not to do it because it would introduce a style variation that I considered worse than having the implied assumption. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net