On Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 01:22:21PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Luming Yu <luming...@shingroup.cn> writes:
> > From: Yu Luming <luming...@gmail.com>
> >
> > ppc always do its own tracking for batch tlb.
>
> I don't think it does? :)
>
> I think you're referring to the batch handling in
> arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/tlbflush-hash.h ?
>
> But that's only used for 64-bit Book3S with the HPT MMU.
>
> > By trivially enabling
> > the ARCH_WANT_BATCHED_UNMAP_TLB_FLUSH in ppc, ppc arch can re-use
> > common code in rmap and reduce overhead and do optimization it could not
> > have without a tlb flushing context at low architecture level.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Luming Yu <luming...@shingroup.cn>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 1 +
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/tlbbatch.h | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 31 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/include/asm/tlbbatch.h
>
> This doesn't build:
>
> https://github.com/linuxppc/linux-snowpatch/actions/runs/10919442655
>
> Can you please follow the instructions here:
>
> https://github.com/linuxppc/wiki/wiki/Testing-with-GitHub-Actions
>
> Which describe how to fork our CI tree that has Github Actions
> preconfigured, then you can apply your patches on top and push to github
> and it will do some test builds for you. Notably it will do 32-bit
> builds which is what broke here.
thanks, I will take a look and do this for next patch before posting on mailing
list. :-)
Ideally it should also include qemu boot tests for targets that must work.
I think we could also need a powerpc yocto recipe as well to make patch test
more customizable
and reproducible than fedora/Debian distro. I've been searching for it for a
while, but I couldn't find a useful one. Maybe I need to come up one of my own
to facilitate the ci test bot ideas.
>
> cheers
>
