On 03/04/2016 10:19 AM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > Anshuman Khandual <khand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > >> On 03/02/2016 05:40 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: >>> On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 08:46:12 UTC, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>>> For partition running on PHYP, there can be a adjunct partition >>>> which shares the virtual address range with the operating system. >>>> Virtual address ranges which can be used by the adjunct partition >>>> are communicated with virtual device node of the device tree with >>>> a property known as "ibm,reserved-virtual-addresses". This patch >>>> introduces a new function named 'validate_reserved_va_range' which >>>> is called inside 'setup_system' to validate that these reserved >>>> virtual address ranges do not overlap with the address ranges used >>>> by the kernel for all supported memory contexts. This helps prevent >>>> the possibility of getting return codes similar to H_RESOURCE for >>>> H_PROTECT hcalls for conflicting HPTE entries. >>> >>> Good plan. >> >> Thanks ! >> >>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu.h >>>> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu.h >>>> index 3d5abfe..95257c1 100644 >>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c >>>> b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c >>>> index 5c03a6a..04bc592 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c >>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c >>>> @@ -546,6 +546,8 @@ void __init setup_system(void) >>>> smp_release_cpus(); >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> + validate_reserved_va_range(); >>>> + >>> >>> I don't see why this can't just be an initcall in hash_utils_64.c, rather >>> than >>> being called from here. >> >> That works, will change it. >> >>> >>>> pr_info("Starting Linux %s %s\n", init_utsname()->machine, >>>> init_utsname()->version); >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c >>>> b/arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c >>>> index ba59d59..03adafc 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c >>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/hash_utils_64.c >>>> @@ -810,6 +810,57 @@ void __init early_init_mmu(void) >>>> slb_initialize(); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +/* >>>> + * PAPR says that each record contains 3 * 32 bit element, hence 12 bytes. >>>> + * First two element contains the abbreviated virtual address (high order >>>> + * 32 bits and low order 32 bits generates the abbreviated virtual address >>>> + * of 64 bits which need to be concatenated with 12 bits of 0 at the end >>>> + * to generate the actual 76 bit reserved virtual address) and size of the >>>> + * reserved virtual address range is encoded in next 32 bit element as >>>> number >>>> + * of 4K pages. >>>> + */ >>>> +#define BYTES_PER_RVA_RECORD 12 >>> >>> Please define a properly endian-annotated struct which encodes the layout. >> >> something like this ? >> >> struct reserved_va_record { >> __be32 high_addr; /* High 32 bits of the abbreviated VA */ >> __be32 low_addr; /* Low 32 bits of the abbreviated VA */ >> __be32 nr_4k; /* VA range in multiple of 4K pages */ >> }; >> >>> >>> It can be local to the function if that works. >>> >> >> Okay. >> >>>> +/* >>>> + * Linux uses 65 bits (MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS + CONTEXT_BITS) from available 78 >>>> + * bit wide virtual address range. As reserved virtual address range comes >>>> + * as an abbreviated form of 64 bits, we will use a partial address mask >>>> + * (65 bit mask >> 12) to match it for simplicity. >>>> + */ >>>> +#define PARTIAL_USED_VA_MASK 0x1FFFFFFFFFFFFFULL >>> >>> Please calculate this from the appropriate constants. We don't want to have >>> to >>> update it in future. >> >> Sure, I guess something like this works. >> >> #define RVA_SKIPPED_BITS 12 /* This changes with PAPR */ >> #define USED_VA_BITS MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS + CONTEXT_BITS > > context + esid + sid shift it should be
Yeah its more appropriate but but we dont have any constants like ESID_SHIFT (or ESID_SHIFT_1T) to match SID_SHIFT (or SID_SHIFT_1T) which adds up to 46 bits of EA. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev