From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1754652AbZCKQxi@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754652AbZCKQxi (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:53:38 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750909AbZCKQxa
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:53:30 -0400
Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:42516 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751106AbZCKQx3 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:53:29 -0400
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:52:52 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
       x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: unify kmap_atomic_pfn() and
	iomap_atomic_prot_pfn()
Message-ID: <20090311165252.GB30777@elte.hu>
References: <20090311143317.GA22244@localhost.localdomain> <alpine.LFD.2.00.0903111606350.29264@localhost.localdomain> <961aa3350903110825y1af77709q49d6328703081afb@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <961aa3350903110825y1af77709q49d6328703081afb@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean
X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5
X-ELTE-SpamLevel: 
X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no
X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 
X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3
	-1.5 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/3/12 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>:
> > On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Akinobu Mita wrote:
> >> kmap_atomic_pfn() and iomap_atomic_prot_pfn() are almost same except
> >> pgprot. This patch removes the code duplication for these two functions.
> >
> > How exaclty does this compile with CONFIG_HIGHMEM=n ?
> >
> 
> Oh, I didn't try without CONFIG_HIGHMEM.

i had it applied in testing locally and didnt see problems so 
far. Let me know if you can see any problems.

	Ingo