Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:09:30 -0500 From: Alan Cox <alc@cs.rice.edu> To: Randall Stewart <rrs@lakerest.net> Cc: freebsd-mips@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Merging 64 bit changes to -HEAD - part 2 Message-ID: <4C1AAB2A.5030507@cs.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <763BEBBB-B85A-44CE-BFEE-0BADEFF3C185@lakerest.net> References: <20100617.100235.195066307596264499.imp@bsdimp.com> <AANLkTimkF47RlysFOrma0YhWNDw2w5Lcp9SB1bBoPuxW@mail.gmail.com> <4B66E1A4-E2A5-471F-9FA4-38B506797272@lakerest.net> <20100617.110504.200754750200158040.imp@bsdimp.com> <763BEBBB-B85A-44CE-BFEE-0BADEFF3C185@lakerest.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 6/17/2010 5:30 PM, Randall Stewart wrote: > > On Jun 17, 2010, at 1:05 PM, M. Warner Losh wrote: > >> >> >> It was also a name-space collision, so we were using PG_x instead of >> PG_y in the PTE code due to the overlap. Maybe it all works now, but >> that was the motivation for the change. > > > > Yes, basically if I remember right someone used > > PG_GLOBAL instead of PG_G. This caused the wrong bits > to be set. > > In general I think its a BAD idea to have two name spaces in the > same section of the system (VM) that have similar define's that mean > different things. > > > Far better to KEEP the PTE_xxx or for that matter pick something > else.. Just > NOT PG_xxx There is precedent for the PTE_ prefix: ia64 and powerpc. I would stick with it. (For the historically inclined, the name space collision goes back to CVS revision 1.1 of the relevant files, i.e., 1993.) Alanhome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C1AAB2A.5030507>