Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,thp: refactor generic deposit/withdraw routines for wider usage

From	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,thp: refactor generic deposit/withdraw routines for wider usage
Date	2016-02-11 11:30 +0100
Message-ID	<r0WFz-7oR-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<r0WFA-7oR-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <r0WFA-7oR-13@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:58:26 +0530
Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com> wrote:

> Generic pgtable_trans_huge_deposit()/pgtable_trans_huge_withdraw()
> assume pgtable_t to be struct page * which is not true for all arches.
> Thus arc, s390, sparch end up with their own copies despite no special
> hardware requirements (unlike powerpc).

s390 does have a special hardware requirement. pgtable_t is an address
for a 2K block of memory. It is *not* equivalent to a struct page *
which refers to a 4K block of memory. That has been the whole point
to introduce pgtable_t.

> It seems massaging the code a bit can make it reusbale.

Imho the new code for asm-generic looks fine, as long as the override
with __HAVE_ARCH_PGTABLE_DEPOSIT/__HAVE_ARCH_PGTABLE_WITHDRAW continues
to work I do not mind.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,thp: refactor generic deposit/withdraw routines  for wider usage Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> - 2016-02-11 11:30 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,thp: refactor generic deposit/withdraw routines  for wider usage Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> - 2016-02-11 12:30 +0100

csiph-web