Message-ID: <9ed766a6-cf06-535d-3337-ea6ff25c2362@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Feb 2023 14:31:37 +0100
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-csky@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
        loongarch@...ts.linux.dev, linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, openrisc@...ts.librecores.org,
        linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org,
        Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mm-unstable v1 11/26] microblaze/mm: support
 __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE

On 26.02.23 21:13, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi David,

Hi Geert,

> 
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 6:16 PM David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
>> Let's support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE by stealing one bit
>> from the type. Generic MM currently only uses 5 bits for the type
>> (MAX_SWAPFILES_SHIFT), so the stolen bit is effectively unused.
>>
>> The shift by 2 when converting between PTE and arch-specific swap entry
>> makes the swap PTE layout a little bit harder to decipher.
>>
>> While at it, drop the comment from paulus---copy-and-paste leftover
>> from powerpc where we actually have _PAGE_HASHPTE---and mask the type in
>> __swp_entry_to_pte() as well.
>>
>> Cc: Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> 
> Thanks for your patch, which is now commit b5c88f21531c3457
> ("microblaze/mm: support __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE") in
> 

Right, it went upstream, so we can only fixup.

>>   arch/m68k/include/asm/mcf_pgtable.h   |  4 +--
> 
> What is this m68k change doing here?
> Sorry for not noticing this earlier.

Thanks for the late review, still valuable :)

That hunk should have gone into the previous patch, looks like I messed 
that up when reworking.

> 
> Furthermore, several things below look strange to me...
> 
>>   arch/microblaze/include/asm/pgtable.h | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++------
>>   2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/m68k/include/asm/mcf_pgtable.h b/arch/m68k/include/asm/mcf_pgtable.h
>> index 3f8f4d0e66dd..e573d7b649f7 100644
>> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/mcf_pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/mcf_pgtable.h
>> @@ -46,8 +46,8 @@
>>   #define _CACHEMASK040          (~0x060)
>>   #define _PAGE_GLOBAL040                0x400   /* 68040 global bit, used for kva descs */
>>
>> -/* We borrow bit 7 to store the exclusive marker in swap PTEs. */
>> -#define _PAGE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE    0x080
>> +/* We borrow bit 24 to store the exclusive marker in swap PTEs. */
>> +#define _PAGE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE    CF_PAGE_NOCACHE
> 
> CF_PAGE_NOCACHE is 0x80, so this is still bit 7, thus the new comment
> is wrong?

You're right, it's still bit 7 (and we use LSB-0 bit numbering in that 
file). I'll send a fixup.

> 
>>
>>   /*
>>    * Externally used page protection values.
>> diff --git a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/pgtable.h b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> index 42f5988e998b..7e3de54bf426 100644
>> --- a/arch/microblaze/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> +++ b/arch/microblaze/include/asm/pgtable.h
>> @@ -131,10 +131,10 @@ extern pte_t *va_to_pte(unsigned long address);
>>    * of the 16 available.  Bit 24-26 of the TLB are cleared in the TLB
>>    * miss handler.  Bit 27 is PAGE_USER, thus selecting the correct
>>    * zone.
>> - * - PRESENT *must* be in the bottom two bits because swap cache
>> - * entries use the top 30 bits.  Because 4xx doesn't support SMP
>> - * anyway, M is irrelevant so we borrow it for PAGE_PRESENT.  Bit 30
>> - * is cleared in the TLB miss handler before the TLB entry is loaded.
>> + * - PRESENT *must* be in the bottom two bits because swap PTEs use the top
>> + * 30 bits.  Because 4xx doesn't support SMP anyway, M is irrelevant so we
>> + * borrow it for PAGE_PRESENT.  Bit 30 is cleared in the TLB miss handler
>> + * before the TLB entry is loaded.
> 
> So the PowerPC 4xx comment is still here?

I only dropped the comment above __swp_type(). I guess you mean that we 
could also drop the "Because 4xx doesn't support SMP anyway, M is 
irrelevant so we borrow it for PAGE_PRESENT." sentence, correct? Not 
sure about the "Bit 30 is cleared in the TLB miss handler" comment, if 
that can similarly be dropped.

> 
>>    * - All other bits of the PTE are loaded into TLBLO without
>>    *  * modification, leaving us only the bits 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 30 for
>>    * software PTE bits.  We actually use bits 21, 24, 25, and
>> @@ -155,6 +155,9 @@ extern pte_t *va_to_pte(unsigned long address);
>>   #define _PAGE_ACCESSED 0x400   /* software: R: page referenced */
>>   #define _PMD_PRESENT   PAGE_MASK
>>
>> +/* We borrow bit 24 to store the exclusive marker in swap PTEs. */
>> +#define _PAGE_SWP_EXCLUSIVE    _PAGE_DIRTY
> 
> _PAGE_DIRTY is 0x80, so this is also bit 7, thus the new comment is
> wrong?

In the example, I use MSB-0 bit numbering (which I determined to be 
correct in microblaze context eventually, but I got confused a couple a 
times because it's very inconsistent). That should be MSB-0 bit 24.

Thanks!

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb

Powered by blists - more mailing lists