[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080309185752.GA9548@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:57:52 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>, hans.rosenfeld@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: bisected boot regression post 2.6.25-rc3.. please revert
* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> So I would *very* strongly instead argue:
>
> - "unsigned long" is the native kernel type for all address manipulation,
> and thus "PAGE_SIZE" and "PAGE_MASK" should continue to have that type.
>
> - anything that uses any other type without explicitly making sure it's
> safe is mis-using those macros. IOW, PAGE_MASk was *never* a type that
> had anything what-so-ever to do with page table entry bits, and this is
> purely a page table entry issue!
>
> So my suggested patch would:
>
> - make the page table code use a specific mask that it builds up itself,
> and makes sure it's of the right type and has the rigth value in
> whatever type "struct pte_entry" is. The fact that "pte_val()" is
> larger than "unsigned long" on x86-32 is very clearly a PTE issue,
> *not* an issue for PAGE_SIZE or PAGE_MASK.
yeah, indeed my patch was sloppy, i didnt think it through - i fell for
the lure of the easy-looking 'PAGE_SIZE is small, sign-extend it' hack.
Will do it cleanly and will also clean up all the pte/address/pgprot
type mixing that currently goes on in this maze of macros.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists