[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinej2U_tEWM25m7VW7=PndxVPohaKjJ=10wn+C1@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 21:46:14 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/20] ARM: LPAE: Do not assume Linux PTEs are always
at PTRS_PER_PTE offset
On 15 November 2010 17:42, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 06:00:24PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> Placing the Linux PTEs at a 2KB offset inside a page is a workaround for
>> the 2-level page table format where not enough spare bits are available.
>> With LPAE this is no longer required. This patch changes such assumption
>> by using a different macro, LINUX_PTE_OFFSET, which is defined to
>> PTRS_PER_PTE for the 2-level page tables.
>
> Hmm. I think we should be doing this a different way - in fact, I think
> we should switch the order of the linux vs hardware page tables. This
> actually simplifies the code a bit too - notice that we lose the arith.
> in __pte_map, __pte_unmap, pmd_page_vaddr, which is all page table
> walking stuff.
It looks like a good clean-up to me (though I need some refactoring on
my LPAE patches). Do you plan to push this upstream? If you add a
comment and a signed-off line, I can carry it in my LPAE branch until
it appears in mainline.
Thanks.
--
Catalin
--
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