[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6b0de827-738d-b3c5-fc79-8ca9047bad35@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 13:25:18 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Thomas Hellström (Intel)
<thomas_os@...pmail.org>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
"christian.koenig@....com" <christian.koenig@....com>,
"jgg@...dia.com" <jgg@...dia.com>,
"airlied@...ux.ie" <airlied@...ux.ie>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] mm,drm/ttm: Block fast GUP to TTM huge pages
On 3/24/21 1:22 PM, Thomas Hellström (Intel) wrote:
>> We also have not been careful at *all* about how _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW* are
>> used. It's quite possible we can encode another use even in the
>> existing bits.
>>
>> Personally, I'd just try:
>>
>> #define _PAGE_BIT_SOFTW5 57 /* available for programmer */
>>
> OK, I'll follow your advise here. FWIW I grepped for SW1 and it seems
> used in a selftest, but only for PTEs AFAICT.
>
> Oh, and we don't care about 32-bit much anymore?
On x86, we have 64-bit PTEs when running 32-bit kernels if PAE is
enabled. IOW, we can handle the majority of 32-bit CPUs out there.
But, yeah, we don't care about 32-bit. :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists