[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200710135709.GB14845@osiris>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 15:57:09 +0200
From: Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/9] s390: implement and optimize vmemmap_free()
On Wed, Jul 08, 2020 at 02:16:39PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >>> Hmm.. I really would like to see if there would be only a single page
> >>> table walker left in vmem.c, which handles both adding and removing
> >>> things.
> >>> Now we end up with two different page table walk implementations
> >>> within the same file. However not sure if it is worth the effort to
> >>> unify them though.
> >>
> >> I tried to unify vmemmap_populate() and vmem_add_range() already and
> >> didn't like the end result ... so, unifying these along with the removal
> >> part won't be any better - most probably. Open for suggestions :)
> >>
> >> (at least arm64 and x86-64 handle it similarly)
> >>
> >
> > I'll play with something like
> >
> > static void modify_pagetable(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> > bool direct, bool add)
> >
> > and see how it turns out.
> >
>
> Did a quick hack. With a single walker (modify_pagetable) I get
>
> arch/s390/mm/vmem.c | 628 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
> 1 file changed, 434 insertions(+), 194 deletions(-)
>
> Overall looks cleaner, only modify_pte_table() and modify_pmd_table()
> are a little more involved ...
Would you mind to resend the series with this integrated?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists