???? Apply which patch? Can you clarify this.... should the final line
be:-
unsigned long last = ((end-1) & PGDIR_MASK) + PGDIR_SIZE;
or
unsigned long last = (end + PGDIR_SIZE -1) & PGDIR_MASK;
They seem to be equivalent to me, but I have the line:-
unsigned long last = (end + PGDIR_SIZE -1) & PGDIR_MASK;
in my merge as I chose to leave Linus' version... it works OK, so far as I
can tell.
James
On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Laszlo Vecsey wrote:
> This was brought up on the linux-kernel mailing list recently, I believe
> molnar ingo made this change, the latter representation is indeed correct.
>
> (apply the patch)
>
> On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Stephen Costaras wrote:
>
> >
> > I tried patching the 2.2.1 kernel w/ the latest patch on ftp.us.kernel.org
> > (19990128-2.2.0). Everything worked ok except for the patch against:
> >
> > mm/mmap.c
> >
> > Seems that this patch is trying to do the following:
> >
> >
> > ***************
> > *** 556,562 ****
> > unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > {
> > unsigned long first = start & PGDIR_MASK;
> > - unsigned long last = (end & PGDIR_MASK) + PGDIR_SIZE;
> >
> > if (!prev) {
> > prev = mm->mmap;
> > --- 556,562 ----
> > unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > {
> > unsigned long first = start & PGDIR_MASK;
> > + unsigned long last = ((end-1) & PGDIR_MASK) + PGDIR_SIZE;
> >
> > if (!prev) {
> > prev = mm->mmap;
> >
> > BUT that line is actually:
> >
> > unsigned long last = (end + PGDIR_SIZE -1) & PGDIR_MASK;
> >
> > ...
> >
> >
> > I'm not at all familiar with this level of the kernel so does anyone
> > know if this is ok to leave?
> >
> > Steve
> >
>
James ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
My operating system unders~1 long filena~1, and yours?
