[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <276d9794-a1b4-4f0d-a9a3-027823038ecc@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 22:52:27 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Michael Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"Baoquan He" <bhe@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, schnelle@...ux.ibm.com,
"David Laight" <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
"Stafford Horne" <shorne@...il.com>,
"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] mm/ioremap: Consider IOREMAP space in generic ioremap
On Mon, Oct 17, 2022, at 2:50 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de> writes:
>>
>> My guess is that there was no technical reason for this, other
>> than having no reason to change the behavior at the time.
>
> I think the immediate reason for it is that on some CPUs we have to use
> 4K pages in the HPT for IO mappings, but PAGE_SIZE == 64K, and we can
> only have a single page size per segment (256M or 1T).
Right, makes sense. Both the original patch, or the variant with
defining IOREMAP_START everywhere seem fine to me then.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists