[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55de7884-a564-72a4-fe83-173a80aac6ad@benettiengineering.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2022 18:29:07 +0200
From: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] ARM: mm: convert empty_zero_page to array for
consistency
Hello Russell,
On 19/10/22 16:44, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 12:25:03AM +0200, Giulio Benetti wrote:
>> ARM architecture is the only one to have empty_zero_page to be a
>> struct page pointer, while in all other implementations empty_zero_page is
>> a data pointer or directly an array(the zero page itself). So let's convert
>> empty_zero_page to an array for consistency and to avoid an early
>> allocation+dcache flush. Being the array in .bss it will be cleared earlier
>> in a more linear way(and a bit faster) way.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com>
>
> I'm completely against this approach. It introduces inefficiencies in
> paths we don't need, and also means that the zero page is at a fixed
> location relative to the kernel, neither of which I like in the
> slightest.
I haven't considered those details, I'm pretty new in this topic.
I was thinking with a no-mmu approach in my mind, that's why the
.bss approach. And also the exposure of the entire array to the other
subsystem is not a good idea.
Thank you for pointing me
Best regads
--
Giulio Benetti
CEO/CTO@...etti Engineering sas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists