tlb_is_full_mm?  What does that mean?  The TLB is full?  No, it means that the
mm's last user has gone and the whole mm is being torn down.  And it's an
inline function because sparc64 uses a different (slightly better)
"tlb_frozen" name for the flag others call "fullmm".

And now the ptep_get_and_clear_full macro used in zap_pte_range refers
directly to tlb->fullmm, which would be wrong for sparc64.  Rather than
correct that, I'd prefer to scrap tlb_is_full_mm altogether, and change
sparc64 to just use the same poor name as everyone else - is that okay?
Signed-off-by: NHugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>

tlb_gather_mmu dates from before kernel preemption was allowed, and uses
smp_processor_id or __get_cpu_var to find its per-cpu mmu_gather.  That works
because it's currently only called after getting page_table_lock, which is not
dropped until after the matching tlb_finish_mmu.  But don't rely on that, it
will soon change: now disable preemption internally by proper get_cpu_var in
tlb_gather_mmu, put_cpu_var in tlb_finish_mmu.
Signed-off-by: NHugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>

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!