[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 18:46:12 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Zhenyu Ye <yezhenyu2@...wei.com>, will@...nel.org,
suzuki.poulose@....com, steven.price@....com, guohanjun@...wei.com,
olof@...om.net, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, arm@...nel.org, xiexiangyou@...wei.com,
prime.zeng@...ilicon.com, zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com,
kuhn.chenqun@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 2/2] arm64: tlb: Use the TLBI RANGE feature in
arm64
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 06:43:35PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-07-07 18:36, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 10:47:13PM +0800, Zhenyu Ye wrote:
> > > @@ -59,6 +69,47 @@
> > > __ta; \
> > > })
> > >
> > > +/*
> > > + * __TG defines translation granule of the system, which is decided
> > > by
> > > + * PAGE_SHIFT. Used by TTL.
> > > + * - 4KB : 1
> > > + * - 16KB : 2
> > > + * - 64KB : 3
> > > + */
> > > +#define __TG ((PAGE_SHIFT - 12) / 2 + 1)
> >
> > Nitpick: maybe something like __TLBI_TG to avoid clashes in case someone
> > else defines a __TG macro.
>
> I have commented on this in the past, and still maintain that this
> would be better served by a switch statement similar to what is used
> for TTL already (I don't think this magic formula exists in the
> ARM ARM).
Good point, it would be cleaner indeed.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists