Fix these 2.6.19-rc1 build warnings from modpost:
WARNING: vmlinux - Section mismatch: reference to .init.text:__alloc_bootmem from .text between 'srmmu_nocache_init' (at offset 0x1a0f8) and 'srmmu_mmu_info'
WARNING: vmlinux - Section mismatch: reference to .init.text:__alloc_bootmem from .text between 'srmmu_nocache_init' (at offset 0x1a118) and 'srmmu_mmu_info'
WARNING: vmlinux - Section mismatch: reference to .init.text:srmmu_early_allocate_ptable_skeleton from .text between 'srmmu_nocache_init' (at offset 0x1a188) and 'srmmu_mmu_info'
Signed-off-by: Martin Habets <errandir_news@mph.eclipse.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
One of the changes necessary for shared page tables is to standardize the
pxx_page macros. pte_page and pmd_page have always returned the struct
page associated with their entry, while pte_page_kernel and pmd_page_kernel
have returned the kernel virtual address. pud_page and pgd_page, on the
other hand, return the kernel virtual address.
Shared page tables needs pud_page and pgd_page to return the actual page
structures. There are very few actual users of these functions, so it is
simple to standardize their usage.
Since this is basic cleanup, I am submitting these changes as a standalone
patch. Per Hugh Dickins' comments about it, I am also changing the
pxx_page_kernel macros to pxx_page_vaddr to clarify their meaning.
Signed-off-by: Dave McCracken <dmccr@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Todo items:
- IRQ_INPROGRESS flag - use sparc64 irq buckets, or generic irq_desc?
- sun4d
- re-indent large chunks of sun4m_smp.c
- some places assume sequential cpu numbering (i.e. 0,1 instead of 0,2)
Last I checked (with 2.6.14), random programs segfault with dual
HyperSPARC. And with SuperSPARC II's, it seems stable but will
eventually die from a write lock error (wrong lock owner or something).
I haven't tried the HyperSPARC + highmem combination recently, so that
may still be a problem.
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.
Let it rip!
Martin Habets