[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160629153731.GA31214@arbab-laptop.austin.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 10:37:31 -0500
From: Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
Vasant Hegde <hegdevasant@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>,
"Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@...il.com>,
Nathan Fontenot <nfont@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: update arch_{add,remove}_memory() for radix
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 09:21:05PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>No, you need to use mmu_linear_psize for the hotplug case.
>
>But you can probably factor out a common routine that both cases use, and hide
>the hash vs radix check in that.
Okay, I'm trying to refactor {create,remove}_section_mapping() into
hash__ and radix__ variants. This lead to a couple of questions.
Pseudocode for radix__create_section_mapping(start, end):
page_size = 1 << mmu_psize_defs[mmu_linear_psize].shift;
start = _ALIGN_DOWN(start, page_size);
for (; start < end; start += page_size) {
radix__map_kernel_page(start, __pa(start),
PAGE_KERNEL, page_size);
}
Should the above use PAGE_KERNEL, like the the hash table bolt, or
(_PAGE_PRESENT | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_KERNEL_RW), like in the radix
vmemmap creation?
The other question is what radix__remove_section_mapping() should do.
I don't know offhand what the opposite of map_kernel_page() is. As
Aneesh mentioned, radix vmemmap removal is currently stubbed as a FIXME
so I couldn't use that as a reference.
--
Reza Arbab
Powered by blists - more mailing lists