#2164 closed enhancement (invalid)
Provide convinience function for map_mem(), it's duplicated many times.
| Reported by: | tqh | Owned by: | axeld |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | R1 |
| Component: | System/Kernel | Version: | R1/pre-alpha1 |
| Keywords: | Cc: | ||
| Blocked By: | Blocking: | ||
| Platform: | All |
Description
It seems everone wants their own version of map_mem(..). This probably should be provided for them instead.
See http://haiku.it.su.se:8180/source/search?q=&defs=map_mem&refs=&path=&hist=
Change History (3)
comment:1 by , 17 years ago
| Resolution: | → invalid |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → closed |
comment:2 by , 17 years ago
They are not really the same, map_mem is a wrapper for a common use of map_physical_memory. So it does definatly have it's use. IMHO I think it would be beneficial to have one function to trace/debug/optimize. Leaving it for you to decide though.
comment:3 by , 17 years ago
map_physical_memory() only has one use. map_mem() does nothing more than call it, and take care of the physical offset - which would be one extra line.
Note:
See TracTickets
for help on using tickets.
It exists and is called map_physical_memory(). This map_mem() function obviously only exists because people copy from each other, or have their own preferences :-)