We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required by pte_next_pfn().
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand
---
arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 ++
arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 ++
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/
On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
> simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required by pte_next_pfn().
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand
> ---
> arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 ++
> arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h
On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required by pte_next_pfn().
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand
---
arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h | 2 ++
arc
On 23.01.24 11:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required by pte_next_pfn().
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand
---
On 23/01/2024 10:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
>>> simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required by pte_next_pfn().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: David H
Le 23/01/2024 à 11:48, David Hildenbrand a écrit :
> On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
>>> simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required by pte_next_pfn().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by:
Le 23/01/2024 à 12:08, Ryan Roberts a écrit :
> On 23/01/2024 10:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>> On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, requ
On 23/01/2024 11:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 23.01.24 11:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>> On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
simpliy define PFN_PTE_SHIFT, required
If high bits are used for
something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batch() purposes, we'd not
detect "belongs to this folio batch" either way.
Exactly.
Maybe it's likely cleaner to also have a custom pte_next
On 23.01.24 12:17, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 23/01/2024 11:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 23.01.24 11:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
We want to make use of pte_next_pfn() outside of set_ptes(). Let's
simpliy defi
On 23/01/2024 11:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>
If high bits are used for
something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batch() purposes, we'd
not
detect "belongs to this folio batch" either wa
On 23.01.24 12:38, Ryan Roberts wrote:
On 23/01/2024 11:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:
If high bits are used for
something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batch() purposes, we'd not
detect "belongs to this folio ba
On 23/01/2024 11:33, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 23.01.24 12:17, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 23/01/2024 11:02, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 23.01.24 11:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 23.01.24 11:34, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 22/01/2024 19:41, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> We want to m
Le 23/01/2024 à 12:38, Ryan Roberts a écrit :
> On 23/01/2024 11:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> If high bits are used for
> something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
> shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batch() purposes, we'd
>
On 23.01.24 12:48, Christophe Leroy wrote:
Le 23/01/2024 à 12:38, Ryan Roberts a écrit :
On 23/01/2024 11:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:
If high bits are used for
something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batch(
On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:34:21AM +, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> > +#define PFN_PTE_SHIFT PAGE_SHIFT
>
> I think this is buggy. And so is the arm64 implementation of set_ptes(). It
> works fine for 48-bit output address, but for 52-bit OAs, the high bits are
> not
> kept contigously,
On 23/01/2024 15:01, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 10:34:21AM +, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>>> +#define PFN_PTE_SHIFT PAGE_SHIFT
>>
>> I think this is buggy. And so is the arm64 implementation of set_ptes(). It
>> works fine for 48-bit output address, but for 52-bit OAs
David Hildenbrand writes:
> On 23.01.24 12:38, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 23/01/2024 11:31, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
>> If high bits are used for
>> something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
>> shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batc
David Hildenbrand writes:
>>>
If high bits are used for
something else, then we might produce a garbage PTE on overflow, but that
shouldn't really matter I concluded for folio_pte_batch() purposes, we'd
not
detect "belongs to this folio batch" either way.
>>>
>>> Exactly
19 matches
Mail list logo
