linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 5/8] arm64: Move hugetlb related definitions out of pgtable.h to page-defs.h

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 09 Sep 2019 08:27:01 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        mst@...hat.com, catalin.marinas@....com, dave.hansen@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, willy@...radead.org,
        mhocko@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        will@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        osalvador@...e.de
Cc:     yang.zhang.wz@...il.com, pagupta@...hat.com,
        konrad.wilk@...cle.com, nitesh@...hat.com, riel@...riel.com,
        lcapitulino@...hat.com, wei.w.wang@...el.com, aarcange@...hat.com,
        ying.huang@...el.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        dan.j.williams@...el.com, fengguang.wu@...el.com,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 5/8] arm64: Move hugetlb related definitions out of
 pgtable.h to page-defs.h

On Mon, 2019-09-09 at 10:52 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 07.09.19 19:25, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Move the static definition for things such as HUGETLB_PAGE_ORDER out of
> > asm/pgtable.h and place it in page-defs.h. By doing this the includes
> > become much easier to deal with as currently arm64 is the only architecture
> > that didn't include this definition in the asm/page.h file or a file
> > included by it.
> > 
> > It also makes logical sense as PAGE_SHIFT was already defined in
> > page-defs.h so now we also have HPAGE_SHIFT defined there as well.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/page-def.h |    9 +++++++++
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h  |    9 ---------
> >  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page-def.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page-def.h
> > index f99d48ecbeef..1c5b079e2482 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/page-def.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/page-def.h
> > @@ -20,4 +20,13 @@
> >  #define CONT_SIZE		(_AC(1, UL) << (CONT_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT))
> >  #define CONT_MASK		(~(CONT_SIZE-1))
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * Hugetlb definitions.
> > + */
> > +#define HUGE_MAX_HSTATE		4
> > +#define HPAGE_SHIFT		PMD_SHIFT
> > +#define HPAGE_SIZE		(_AC(1, UL) << HPAGE_SHIFT)
> > +#define HPAGE_MASK		(~(HPAGE_SIZE - 1))
> > +#define HUGETLB_PAGE_ORDER	(HPAGE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)
> > +
> 
> I wonder if you should initially limit "config PAGE_REPORTING" to x86
> only and unlock it for the other targets once we actually test it there.
> Or did you test PAGE_REPORTING on other architectures as well?
> 

I haven't, but essentially the effects should be the same regardless of
architecture. In addition since this is a feature that can be
enabled/disabled via QEMU I am not sure there is much harm other than
getting additional testing by enabling for all of the architectures at
once.