[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54927E1E.1030407@c-s.fr>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:11:26 +0100
From: leroy christophe <christophe.leroy@....fr>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>
CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 1/2] powerpc32: adds handling of _PAGE_RO
Le 18/12/2014 03:14, Scott Wood a écrit :
> On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 10:14 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>> Some powerpc like the 8xx don't have a RW bit in PTE bits but a RO (Read Only) bit.
>> This patch implements the handling of a _PAGE_RO flag to be used in place of _PAGE_RW
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
>>
>> ---
>> v2 is a complete rework compared to v1
>>
>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable-ppc32.h | 11 ++++++-----
>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable.h | 10 +++++++---
>> arch/powerpc/include/asm/pte-common.h | 27 ++++++++++++++++++---------
>> arch/powerpc/mm/gup.c | 2 ++
>> arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c | 2 +-
>> arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable_32.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
>> 6 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable-ppc32.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable-ppc32.h
>> index 543bb8e..64ed9e1 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable-ppc32.h
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pgtable-ppc32.h
>> @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ extern int icache_44x_need_flush;
>> #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>>
>> #define pte_clear(mm, addr, ptep) \
>> - do { pte_update(ptep, ~_PAGE_HASHPTE, 0); } while (0)
>> + do { pte_update(ptep, ~_PAGE_HASHPTE, _PAGE_RO); } while (0)
> Is this really necessary? It's already clearing the valid bit.
>
> Likewise in several other places that set or check for _PAGE_RO on pages
> for which no access is permitted.
>
>> @@ -287,8 +287,9 @@ static inline void huge_ptep_set_wrprotect(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> static inline void __ptep_set_access_flags(pte_t *ptep, pte_t entry)
>> {
>> unsigned long bits = pte_val(entry) &
>> - (_PAGE_DIRTY | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_RW | _PAGE_EXEC);
>> - pte_update(ptep, 0, bits);
>> + (_PAGE_DIRTY | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_RW | _PAGE_RO |
>> + _PAGE_EXEC);
>> + pte_update(ptep, _PAGE_RO, bits);
>> }
> You're unconditionally clearing _PAGE_RO, and apparently relying on the
> undocumented behavior of pte_update() to clear "clr" before setting
> "set".
>
> Instead I'd write this as:
>
> unsigned long set = pte_val(entry) &
> (_PAGE_DIRTY | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_RW | _PAGE_EXEC);
> unsigned long clr = pte_val(entry) & _PAGE_RO;
Don't you mean ?
unsigned long clr = ~pte_val(entry) & _PAGE_RO;
Because, we want to clear _PAGE_RO when _PAGE_RO is not set in entry.
Christophe
>
> pte_update(ptep, clr, set);
>
> -Scott
>
--
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