Re: [PATCH V3 08/10] powerpc/mm/hash: Increase VA range to 128TB
From: Michal Suchánek <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-06 15:20:21
On Mon, 06 Mar 2017 09:07:48 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" [off-list ref] wrote:
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" [off-list ref] writes: =20quoted
Michal Such=C3=A1nek [off-list ref] writes: =20quoted
Hello, On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 15:37:15 +0530 "Aneesh Kumar K.V" [off-list ref] wrote: =20quoted
We update the hash linux page table layout such that we can support 512TB. But we limit the TASK_SIZE to 128TB. We can switch to 128TB by default without conditional because that is the max virtual address supported by other architectures. We will later add a mechanism to on-demand increase the application's effective address range to 512TB. =20 Having the page table layout changed to accommodate 512TB makes testing large memory configuration easier with less code changes to kernel =20 Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V [off-list ref] =20.... =20quoted
index b64daf124fee..c7ca70dc3ba5 100644 =20quoted
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c@@ -253,8 +253,15 @@ void copy_mm_to_paca(struct mm_struct *mm) get_paca()->mm_ctx_id =3D context->id; #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MM_SLICES get_paca()->mm_ctx_low_slices_psize =3Dcontext->low_slices_psize; + /* + * We support upto 128TB for now. Hence copy only 128/2 bytes. + * Later when we support tasks with different max effective + * address, we can optimize this based on mm->task_size. + */ + BUILD_BUG_ON(TASK_SIZE_USER64 !=3D TASK_SIZE_128TB); =20Can this be handled by KConfig? Above I see =20I am reworking the series so that we depend on mm->task_size. Will send a new version soon. =20quoted
quoted
+#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64 +#define TASK_SIZE_USER64 TASK_SIZE_128TB +#else +#define TASK_SIZE_USER64 TASK_SIZE_64TB +#endif =20and =20quoted
#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MM_SLICES ILD_BUG_ON(TASK_SIZE_USER64 !=3D TASK_SIZE_128TB) =20which boils down to #ifndef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64 #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MM_SLICES #error TASK_SIZE_USER64 !=3D TASK_SIZE_128TB =20quoted
memcpy(&get_paca()->mm_ctx_high_slices_psize, - &context->high_slices_psize, SLICE_ARRAY_SIZE); + &context->high_slices_psize, TASK_SIZE_128TB >> 41); =20Can we avoid magic numbers, please? =20Since array is 4 bytes per each TB which is documented else where. =20=20 4 bits per teach TB. =20
It is certainly nicer to have a macro for it. You can then see what the number is from the macro name or grep it and find the definition and the explanation. Thanks Michal