Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,thp: refactor generic deposit/withdraw routines for wider usage
From: Vineet Gupta <hidden>
Date: 2016-02-11 10:54:27
Also in:
linux-mm
On Thursday 11 February 2016 03:52 PM, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:58:26 +0530 Vineet Gupta [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Generic pgtable_trans_huge_deposit()/pgtable_trans_huge_withdraw() assume pgtable_t to be struct page * which is not true for all arches. Thus arc, s390, sparch end up with their own copies despite no special hardware requirements (unlike powerpc).s390 does have a special hardware requirement. pgtable_t is an address for a 2K block of memory. It is *not* equivalent to a struct page * which refers to a 4K block of memory. That has been the whole point to introduce pgtable_t.
Actually my reference to hardware requirement was more like powerpc style save a hash value some where etc. Now pgtable_t need not be struct page * even if the actual sizes are same - e.g. in ARC port I kept pgtable_t as pte_t * simply to avoid a few page_address() calls in mm code (you could argue that is was a micro-optimization, anyways..) So given I know nothing about s390 MMU internals, I still think you can switch to the update generic version despite 2K vs. 4K. Agree ?
quoted
It seems massaging the code a bit can make it reusbale.Imho the new code for asm-generic looks fine, as long as the override with __HAVE_ARCH_PGTABLE_DEPOSIT/__HAVE_ARCH_PGTABLE_WITHDRAW continues to work I do not mind.
-- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>