[RFC] VMI for Xen?

[RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

I'm sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for Linux at this 
point, but just in case, the link is included below.

I've read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through most 
of the patches.  While I wasn't really that impressed with the first 
spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more palatable.  
Specifically, the code inlining and afterburner-style padding seems like 
a really promising approach to native-speed single kernel images.  Also, 
this version seems much more friendly to p2m.

There are still a few things missing (like guest DMA support) but I 
think the basic ideas are pretty sane.  So what does everyone else 
think?  Is there anything within VMI that would inhibit some of Xen's 
optimizations?  Are there any disadvantages to a VMI-style approach to 
the subarch changes?

How close are we to being able to merge our stuff with mainline?  Have 
we gotten feedback yet on how hard this is going to be?  Would VMI be an 
easier approach to inclusion in mainline?

Just thought it would be prudent to start a discussion here, at least, 
about it...

http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/3/13/140

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

Just some food for thought,  I did a simple analysis of the size of Xen 
Linux patches verses the VMI patches.  To make things more fair, I 
removed everything from the XenoLinux port accept for the i386 xen 
subarch (so no drivers and no support for other architectures).

VMI:

124 files changed, 4964 insertions(+), 623 deletions(-)

Xen:

185 files changed, 31586 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)

So the Xen port adds 6 times more code than VMI.  I certainly don't 
think VMI for Xen is going to be as fast as native Xen but I don't know 
of anything that would cause a substantial change in VMI to add the 
necessary optimizations that would result in a massive change in the 
size of the patches.

I should also mention that one should also consider the size of the VMI 
Xen ROM too.  For the L4-based ROM that's going to be ~10k lines but I 
expect that if the Xen hypercalls were adjusted a little bit, it would 
drop much less.  For instance, Xen already does platform device 
emulation in the hypervisor for HVM domains so if that were reused it 
would knock out a fair amount of the ROM code.

It seems like there are some merits to the VMI approach.  Is there 
something I'm missing?  I admit I don't understand the XenoLinux changes 
well enough to know with certainity if there's something major that 
justifies the difference in size.  I'm hoping someone can hit me with a 
clue stick though if there is :-)

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> I'm sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for Linux at this 
> point, but just in case, the link is included below.
>
> I've read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through 
> most of the patches.  While I wasn't really that impressed with the 
> first spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more 
> palatable.  Specifically, the code inlining and afterburner-style 
> padding seems like a really promising approach to native-speed single 
> kernel images.  Also, this version seems much more friendly to p2m.
>
> There are still a few things missing (like guest DMA support) but I 
> think the basic ideas are pretty sane.  So what does everyone else 
> think?  Is there anything within VMI that would inhibit some of Xen's 
> optimizations?  Are there any disadvantages to a VMI-style approach to 
> the subarch changes?
>
> How close are we to being able to merge our stuff with mainline?  Have 
> we gotten feedback yet on how hard this is going to be?  Would VMI be 
> an easier approach to inclusion in mainline?
>
> Just thought it would be prudent to start a discussion here, at least, 
> about it...
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/3/13/140
>
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

Christian pointed out that the current Xen tree copies a number of files 
and makes changes to them (renaming them to -xen).  It's unclear how to 
properly count this in my mind since if they went into the tree as-is 
today, it would be a pure addition.  Presumably, they would go in with 
some conditional logic which would reduce the total insertion count 
(dramatically) but also increase the diff size.

This probably helps explains why Chris is seeing such a dramatic 
reduction too.  It's becoming clear to me that when reworked, the Xen 
changes are pretty much identical in code-size to VMI (give or take a 
couple thousand slocs).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Just some food for thought,  I did a simple analysis of the size of 
> Xen Linux patches verses the VMI patches.  To make things more fair, I 
> removed everything from the XenoLinux port accept for the i386 xen 
> subarch (so no drivers and no support for other architectures).
>
> VMI:
>
> 124 files changed, 4964 insertions(+), 623 deletions(-)
>
> Xen:
>
> 185 files changed, 31586 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)
>
> So the Xen port adds 6 times more code than VMI.  I certainly don't 
> think VMI for Xen is going to be as fast as native Xen but I don't 
> know of anything that would cause a substantial change in VMI to add 
> the necessary optimizations that would result in a massive change in 
> the size of the patches.
>
> I should also mention that one should also consider the size of the 
> VMI Xen ROM too.  For the L4-based ROM that's going to be ~10k lines 
> but I expect that if the Xen hypercalls were adjusted a little bit, it 
> would drop much less.  For instance, Xen already does platform device 
> emulation in the hypervisor for HVM domains so if that were reused it 
> would knock out a fair amount of the ROM code.
>
> It seems like there are some merits to the VMI approach.  Is there 
> something I'm missing?  I admit I don't understand the XenoLinux 
> changes well enough to know with certainity if there's something major 
> that justifies the difference in size.  I'm hoping someone can hit me 
> with a clue stick though if there is :-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Anthony Liguori
>
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> I'm sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for Linux at this 
>> point, but just in case, the link is included below.
>>
>> I've read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through 
>> most of the patches.  While I wasn't really that impressed with the 
>> first spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more 
>> palatable.  Specifically, the code inlining and afterburner-style 
>> padding seems like a really promising approach to native-speed single 
>> kernel images.  Also, this version seems much more friendly to p2m.
>>
>> There are still a few things missing (like guest DMA support) but I 
>> think the basic ideas are pretty sane.  So what does everyone else 
>> think?  Is there anything within VMI that would inhibit some of Xen's 
>> optimizations?  Are there any disadvantages to a VMI-style approach 
>> to the subarch changes?
>>
>> How close are we to being able to merge our stuff with mainline?  
>> Have we gotten feedback yet on how hard this is going to be?  Would 
>> VMI be an easier approach to inclusion in mainline?
>>
>> Just thought it would be prudent to start a discussion here, at 
>> least, about it...
>>
>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/3/13/140
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Anthony Liguori
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-devel mailing list
>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>
>

RE: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Ian Pratt]

> Just some food for thought,  I did a simple analysis of the 
> size of Xen Linux patches verses the VMI patches.  To make 
> things more fair, I removed everything from the XenoLinux 
> port accept for the i386 xen subarch (so no drivers and no 
> support for other architectures).

Your analysis is still taking all the patches to make dom0 functionality
work, which accounts for a lot of changes and is totally outside of the
scope of VMI.

We've been working with a bunch of RH/Novell folks to create a stripped
down domU-only Xen patch that would be a fairer comparison.

We're currently looking though the new VMI patchset to see whether
there's anything worth having, in particular, if there's anything that
should be added to our patch to support what we can deduce that their
hypervisor probably needs. We've also talking to the VirtualIron team to
make sure we're inclusive as possible.

The current VMI patchset couldn't support Xen's direct-mode (non shadow)
MMU virtualization, and hasn't really been thought through properly for
SMP. I'm sure we'll get something worked out that keeps everyone happy.

Ian
 
> VMI:
> 
> 124 files changed, 4964 insertions(+), 623 deletions(-)
> 
> Xen:
> 
> 185 files changed, 31586 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)
> 
> So the Xen port adds 6 times more code than VMI.  I certainly 
> don't think VMI for Xen is going to be as fast as native Xen 
> but I don't know of anything that would cause a substantial 
> change in VMI to add the necessary optimizations that would 
> result in a massive change in the size of the patches.
> 
> I should also mention that one should also consider the size 
> of the VMI Xen ROM too.  For the L4-based ROM that's going to 
> be ~10k lines but I expect that if the Xen hypercalls were 
> adjusted a little bit, it would drop much less.  For 
> instance, Xen already does platform device emulation in the 
> hypervisor for HVM domains so if that were reused it would 
> knock out a fair amount of the ROM code.
> 
> It seems like there are some merits to the VMI approach.  Is 
> there something I'm missing?  I admit I don't understand the 
> XenoLinux changes well enough to know with certainity if 
> there's something major that justifies the difference in 
> size.  I'm hoping someone can hit me with a clue stick though 
> if there is :-)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Anthony Liguori
> 
> Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > I'm sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for 
> Linux at this 
> > point, but just in case, the link is included below.
> >
> > I've read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through 
> > most of the patches.  While I wasn't really that impressed with the 
> > first spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more 
> > palatable.  Specifically, the code inlining and afterburner-style 
> > padding seems like a really promising approach to 
> native-speed single 
> > kernel images.  Also, this version seems much more friendly to p2m.
> >
> > There are still a few things missing (like guest DMA support) but I 
> > think the basic ideas are pretty sane.  So what does everyone else 
> > think?  Is there anything within VMI that would inhibit 
> some of Xen's 
> > optimizations?  Are there any disadvantages to a VMI-style 
> approach to 
> > the subarch changes?
> >
> > How close are we to being able to merge our stuff with 
> mainline?  Have 
> > we gotten feedback yet on how hard this is going to be?  
> Would VMI be 
> > an easier approach to inclusion in mainline?
> >
> > Just thought it would be prudent to start a discussion 
> here, at least, 
> > about it...
> >
> > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/3/13/140
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Anthony Liguori
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 
> 

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

Thanks for the response Ian!

Ian Pratt wrote:
> Your analysis is still taking all the patches to make dom0 functionality
> work, which accounts for a lot of changes and is totally outside of the
> scope of VMI.
>   
Could you elaborate a little?  Do you mean direct access to hardware or 
the domain management stuff?  I would expect that it's the former since 
the later should be well isolated in privcmd.
> We've been working with a bunch of RH/Novell folks to create a stripped
> down domU-only Xen patch that would be a fairer comparison.
>   
Ah, excellent, is there code available anywhere?  Has there been 
progress on microxen?
> We're currently looking though the new VMI patchset to see whether
> there's anything worth having, in particular, if there's anything that
> should be added to our patch to support what we can deduce that their
> hypervisor probably needs.
Excellent.  The thing that stuck out to me the most is binary rewriting 
for native code.  There seems that there has been a bit of performance 
work done to suggest that that's the best way to ensure that there's no 
different on native.
>  We've also talking to the VirtualIron team to
> make sure we're inclusive as possible.
>   
Sweet.
> The current VMI patchset couldn't support Xen's direct-mode (non shadow)
> MMU virtualization, and hasn't really been thought through properly for
> SMP. I'm sure we'll get something worked out that keeps everyone happy.
>   
I hope this doesn't appear too prodding.  There seemed to be very little 
technical objection on LKML and I fear that Xen is not being represented 
well enough.  A note on LKML explaining the problems and how Xen solves 
them would certainly being really useful.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
> Ian
>  
>   
>> VMI:
>>
>> 124 files changed, 4964 insertions(+), 623 deletions(-)
>>
>> Xen:
>>
>> 185 files changed, 31586 insertions(+), 142 deletions(-)
>>
>> So the Xen port adds 6 times more code than VMI.  I certainly 
>> don't think VMI for Xen is going to be as fast as native Xen 
>> but I don't know of anything that would cause a substantial 
>> change in VMI to add the necessary optimizations that would 
>> result in a massive change in the size of the patches.
>>
>> I should also mention that one should also consider the size 
>> of the VMI Xen ROM too.  For the L4-based ROM that's going to 
>> be ~10k lines but I expect that if the Xen hypercalls were 
>> adjusted a little bit, it would drop much less.  For 
>> instance, Xen already does platform device emulation in the 
>> hypervisor for HVM domains so if that were reused it would 
>> knock out a fair amount of the ROM code.
>>
>> It seems like there are some merits to the VMI approach.  Is 
>> there something I'm missing?  I admit I don't understand the 
>> XenoLinux changes well enough to know with certainity if 
>> there's something major that justifies the difference in 
>> size.  I'm hoping someone can hit me with a clue stick though 
>> if there is :-)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Anthony Liguori
>>
>> Anthony Liguori wrote:
>>     
>>> I'm sure everyone has seen the drop of VMI patches for 
>>>       
>> Linux at this 
>>     
>>> point, but just in case, the link is included below.
>>>
>>> I've read this version of the VMI spec and have made my way through 
>>> most of the patches.  While I wasn't really that impressed with the 
>>> first spec wrt Xen, the second version seems to be much more 
>>> palatable.  Specifically, the code inlining and afterburner-style 
>>> padding seems like a really promising approach to 
>>>       
>> native-speed single 
>>     
>>> kernel images.  Also, this version seems much more friendly to p2m.
>>>
>>> There are still a few things missing (like guest DMA support) but I 
>>> think the basic ideas are pretty sane.  So what does everyone else 
>>> think?  Is there anything within VMI that would inhibit 
>>>       
>> some of Xen's 
>>     
>>> optimizations?  Are there any disadvantages to a VMI-style 
>>>       
>> approach to 
>>     
>>> the subarch changes?
>>>
>>> How close are we to being able to merge our stuff with 
>>>       
>> mainline?  Have 
>>     
>>> we gotten feedback yet on how hard this is going to be?  
>>>       
>> Would VMI be 
>>     
>>> an easier approach to inclusion in mainline?
>>>
>>> Just thought it would be prudent to start a discussion 
>>>       
>> here, at least, 
>>     
>>> about it...
>>>
>>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/3/13/140
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Anthony Liguori
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Xen-devel mailing list
>>> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
>>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>>>       
>>     

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

Ian Pratt wrote:
>> Just some food for thought,  I did a simple analysis of the 
>> size of Xen Linux patches verses the VMI patches.  To make 
>> things more fair, I removed everything from the XenoLinux 
>> port accept for the i386 xen subarch (so no drivers and no 
>> support for other architectures).
>>     
>
> Your analysis is still taking all the patches to make dom0 functionality
> work, which accounts for a lot of changes and is totally outside of the
> scope of VMI.
>
> We've been working with a bunch of RH/Novell folks to create a stripped
> down domU-only Xen patch that would be a fairer comparison.
>
> We're currently looking though the new VMI patchset to see whether
> there's anything worth having, in particular, if there's anything that
> should be added to our patch to support what we can deduce that their
> hypervisor probably needs. We've also talking to the VirtualIron team to
> make sure we're inclusive as possible.
>
> The current VMI patchset couldn't support Xen's direct-mode (non shadow)
> MMU virtualization, and hasn't really been thought through properly for
> SMP. I'm sure we'll get something worked out that keeps everyone happy.
>   
Actually, the new spec does support non-shadow paging.  All page table 
updates are done via the VMI ROM.  Normally, these are just normal 
get/set operations but they could be get/sets with p2m looks.  The first 
version of the spec definitely didn't support non-shadow paging though.

We'll see whether it's actually implementable when the wedge is released 
though.  I wouldn't be surprised if they are using shadow paging.

The new spec does actually introduce SMP stuff but yeah, you're probably 
right, it may not have been thought through enough...  The biggest gaps 
that I can find appear to be DMA support and event channels.  I think to 
properly support event channel you need a bit more pervasive changes.  I 
think DMA is a pretty simply change (you just have to update the DMA bus 
translation functions to do a p2m lookup).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
> Ian
>   

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Keir Fraser]

On 16 Mar 2006, at 23:33, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> Actually, the new spec does support non-shadow paging.  All page table 
> updates are done via the VMI ROM.  Normally, these are just normal 
> get/set operations but they could be get/sets with p2m looks.  The 
> first version of the spec definitely didn't support non-shadow paging 
> though.

I don't see any hooks for pte reads, which need m2p conversion in a 
non-shadow environment.

And the documentation is out of whack with the code patches now I look 
more closely at the mmu patch. VMI_xxxPxExxx functions are not defined 
in the spec, nor is VMI_AllocatePage.

  -- Keir

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> On 16 Mar 2006, at 23:33, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> Actually, the new spec does support non-shadow paging.  All page 
>> table updates are done via the VMI ROM.  Normally, these are just 
>> normal get/set operations but they could be get/sets with p2m looks.  
>> The first version of the spec definitely didn't support non-shadow 
>> paging though.
>
> I don't see any hooks for pte reads, which need m2p conversion in a 
> non-shadow environment.
VMI_CALL_GetPxE is the hook for pte reads I think.  The documentation 
refers to a SetPte function but that doesn't actually exist in the 
code.  Instead, I believe the pte access functions are GetPxE and SetPxE 
and that they can be used for setting ptes or pmds.  It's not really 
documented though so I may be wrong.
> And the documentation is out of whack with the code patches now I look 
> more closely at the mmu patch. VMI_xxxPxExxx functions are not defined 
> in the spec, nor is VMI_AllocatePage.
Yeah, the documentation is lacking (and wrong) in a couple of key areas.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori
>  -- Keir
>

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Zachary Amsden]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1211 bytes --]

Keir Fraser wrote:
>
> On 16 Mar 2006, at 23:33, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> Actually, the new spec does support non-shadow paging.  All page 
>> table updates are done via the VMI ROM.  Normally, these are just 
>> normal get/set operations but they could be get/sets with p2m looks.  
>> The first version of the spec definitely didn't support non-shadow 
>> paging though.
>
> I don't see any hooks for pte reads, which need m2p conversion in a 
> non-shadow environment.

I've attached a patch.  It is complete, but rather scary to maintain.  I 
think with help from Linus' sparse checker, it might be more easily 
maintained by using noderef on the PTE types.  We would like to propose 
it as an alternative to the m2p conversion layer.

>
> And the documentation is out of whack with the code patches now I look 
> more closely at the mmu patch. VMI_xxxPxExxx functions are not defined 
> in the spec, nor is VMI_AllocatePage.

Yes, as mentioned in the documentation, the MMU part of the spec is out 
of date - specifically because we know there are changes that need to be 
made there to accommodate Xen, and because we would like to shake out 
exactly what the simplest and cleanest interface is.

Zach

[-- Attachment #2: mmu-pte-accessors --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 44994 bytes --]

Introduce the get_pte family of macros.

These will be the hook points for vmi_get_pxe.  I tried to find all
the places a pte_t*, pgd_t*, etc were dereferenced using the compiler,
and compiling for many combinations of CONFIG options.

Testing: verify kernel binary unchanged from this change. Boot kernel.

Signed-off-by: Dan Hecht <dhecht@vmware.com>

Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/kernel/vm86.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/kernel/vm86.c	2006-03-12 19:49:53.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/kernel/vm86.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -155,8 +155,8 @@ static void mark_screen_rdonly(struct mm
 		goto out;
 	pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, 0xA0000, &ptl);
 	for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
-		if (pte_present(*pte))
-			set_pte(pte, pte_wrprotect(*pte));
+		if (pte_present(get_pte(pte)))
+			set_pte(pte, pte_wrprotect(get_pte(pte)));
 		pte++;
 	}
 	pte_unmap_unlock(pte, ptl);
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/sleep.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/sleep.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/kernel/acpi/sleep.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ static void init_low_mapping(pgd_t * pgd
 
 	while ((pgd_ofs < pgd_limit)
 	       && (pgd_ofs + USER_PTRS_PER_PGD < PTRS_PER_PGD)) {
-		set_pgd(pgd, *(pgd + USER_PTRS_PER_PGD));
+		set_pgd(pgd, get_pgd(pgd + USER_PTRS_PER_PGD));
 		pgd_ofs++, pgd++;
 	}
 	flush_tlb_all();
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/fault.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/fault.c	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/fault.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -444,7 +444,7 @@ no_context:
 	if (error_code & 16) {
 		pte_t *pte = lookup_address(address);
 
-		if (pte && pte_present(*pte) && !pte_exec_kernel(*pte))
+		if (pte && pte_present(get_pte(pte)) && !pte_exec_kernel(get_pte(pte)))
 			printk(KERN_CRIT "kernel tried to execute NX-protected page - exploit attempt? (uid: %d)\n", current->uid);
 	}
 #endif
@@ -456,6 +456,7 @@ no_context:
 	printk(KERN_ALERT " printing eip:\n");
 	printk("%08lx\n", regs->eip);
 	page = read_cr3();
+	/* XXXPara: reads page tables without get_pxe. */
 	page = ((unsigned long *) __va(page))[address >> 22];
 	printk(KERN_ALERT "*pde = %08lx\n", page);
 	/*
@@ -532,7 +533,7 @@ vmalloc_fault:
 		pgd = index + (pgd_t *)__va(pgd_paddr);
 		pgd_k = init_mm.pgd + index;
 
-		if (!pgd_present(*pgd_k))
+		if (!pgd_present(get_pgd(pgd_k)))
 			goto no_context;
 
 		/*
@@ -543,24 +544,26 @@ vmalloc_fault:
 
 		pud = pud_offset(pgd, address);
 		pud_k = pud_offset(pgd_k, address);
-		if (!pud_present(*pud_k))
+		if (!pud_present(get_pud(pud_k)))
 			goto no_context;
 		
 		pmd = pmd_offset(pud, address);
 		pmd_k = pmd_offset(pud_k, address);
-		if (!pmd_present(*pmd_k))
+		if (!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd_k)))
 			goto no_context;
-		set_pmd(pmd, *pmd_k);
+		set_pmd(pmd, get_pmd(pmd_k));
 
 		/*
 		 * Needed.  We have just updated this root with a copy of
 		 * the kernel pmd.  To return without flushing would
 		 * introduce a fault loop.
+		 *
+		 * XXXPara: update_mmu_cache args: fixme
 		 */
-		update_mmu_cache(NULL, pmd, pmd_k->pmd);
+		update_mmu_cache(NULL, pmd, get_pmd(pmd_k).pmd);
 
 		pte_k = pte_offset_kernel(pmd_k, address);
-		if (!pte_present(*pte_k))
+		if (!pte_present(get_pte(pte_k)))
 			goto no_context;
 		return;
 	}
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/highmem.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/highmem.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/highmem.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ void *kmap_atomic(struct page *page, enu
 	idx = type + KM_TYPE_NR*smp_processor_id();
 	vaddr = __fix_to_virt(FIX_KMAP_BEGIN + idx);
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_HIGHMEM
-	if (!pte_none(*(kmap_pte-idx)))
+	if (!pte_none(get_pte(kmap_pte-idx)))
 		BUG();
 #endif
 	set_pte(kmap_pte-idx, mk_pte(page, kmap_prot));
@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ struct page *kmap_atomic_to_page(void *p
 
 	idx = virt_to_fix(vaddr);
 	pte = kmap_pte - (idx - FIX_KMAP_BEGIN);
-	return pte_page(*pte);
+	return pte_page(get_pte(pte));
 }
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(kmap);
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/hugetlbpage.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/hugetlbpage.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/hugetlbpage.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ pte_t *huge_pte_alloc(struct mm_struct *
 	pud = pud_alloc(mm, pgd, addr);
 	if (pud)
 		pte = (pte_t *) pmd_alloc(mm, pud, addr);
-	BUG_ON(pte && !pte_none(*pte) && !pte_huge(*pte));
+	BUG_ON(pte && !pte_none(get_pte(pte)) && !pte_huge(get_pte(pte)));
 
 	return pte;
 }
@@ -40,9 +40,9 @@ pte_t *huge_pte_offset(struct mm_struct 
 	pmd_t *pmd = NULL;
 
 	pgd = pgd_offset(mm, addr);
-	if (pgd_present(*pgd)) {
+	if (pgd_present(get_pgd(pgd))) {
 		pud = pud_offset(pgd, addr);
-		if (pud_present(*pud))
+		if (pud_present(get_pud(pud)))
 			pmd = pmd_offset(pud, addr);
 	}
 	return (pte_t *) pmd;
@@ -77,9 +77,9 @@ follow_huge_addr(struct mm_struct *mm, u
 	pte = huge_pte_offset(mm, address);
 
 	/* hugetlb should be locked, and hence, prefaulted */
-	WARN_ON(!pte || pte_none(*pte));
+	WARN_ON(!pte || pte_none(get_pte(pte)));
 
-	page = &pte_page(*pte)[vpfn % (HPAGE_SIZE/PAGE_SIZE)];
+	page = &pte_page(get_pte(pte))[vpfn % (HPAGE_SIZE/PAGE_SIZE)];
 
 	WARN_ON(!PageCompound(page));
 
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ follow_huge_pmd(struct mm_struct *mm, un
 {
 	struct page *page;
 
-	page = pte_page(*(pte_t *)pmd);
+	page = pte_page(get_pte((pte_t *)pmd));
 	if (page)
 		page += ((address & ~HPAGE_MASK) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
 	return page;
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/init.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/init.c	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/init.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ static pmd_t * __init one_md_table_init(
  */
 static pte_t * __init one_page_table_init(pmd_t *pmd)
 {
-	if (pmd_none(*pmd)) {
+	if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd))) {
 		pte_t *page_table = (pte_t *) alloc_bootmem_low_pages(PAGE_SIZE);
 		mach_setup_pte(__pa(page_table) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
 		set_pmd(pmd, __pmd(__pa(page_table) | _PAGE_TABLE));
@@ -116,12 +116,12 @@ static void __init page_table_range_init
 	pgd = pgd_base + pgd_idx;
 
 	for ( ; (pgd_idx < PTRS_PER_PGD) && (vaddr != end); pgd++, pgd_idx++) {
-		if (pgd_none(*pgd)) 
+		if (pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd))) 
 			one_md_table_init(pgd);
 		pud = pud_offset(pgd, vaddr);
 		pmd = pmd_offset(pud, vaddr);
 		for (; (pmd_idx < PTRS_PER_PMD) && (vaddr != end); pmd++, pmd_idx++) {
-			if (pmd_none(*pmd)) 
+			if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd))) 
 				one_page_table_init(pmd);
 
 			vaddr += PMD_SIZE;
@@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ extern void __init remap_numa_kva(void);
 static void __init pagetable_init (void)
 {
 	unsigned long vaddr;
-	pgd_t *pgd_base = swapper_pg_dir;
+	pgd_t *pgd_base = (pgd_t*)swapper_pg_dir;
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_X86_PAE
 	int i;
@@ -380,7 +380,7 @@ static void __init pagetable_init (void)
 	 * All user-space mappings are explicitly cleared after
 	 * SMP startup.
 	 */
-	set_pgd(&pgd_base[0], pgd_base[USER_PTRS_PER_PGD]);
+	set_pgd(&pgd_base[0], get_pgd(&pgd_base[USER_PTRS_PER_PGD]));
 #endif
 
 }
@@ -395,6 +395,7 @@ char __nosavedata swsusp_pg_dir[PAGE_SIZ
 
 static inline void save_pg_dir(void)
 {
+	/* XXXPara: unfiltered read of PD. */
 	memcpy(swsusp_pg_dir, swapper_pg_dir, PAGE_SIZE);
 }
 #else
@@ -480,9 +481,10 @@ int __init set_kernel_exec(unsigned long
 	pte = lookup_address(vaddr);
 	BUG_ON(!pte);
 
-	if (!pte_exec_kernel(*pte))
+	if (!pte_exec_kernel(get_pte(pte)))
 		ret = 0;
 
+	/*XXXPara: fixme. */
 	if (enable)
 		pte->pte_high &= ~(1 << (_PAGE_BIT_NX - 32));
 	else
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/ioremap.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/ioremap.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/ioremap.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@ static int ioremap_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 	if (!pte)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	do {
-		BUG_ON(!pte_none(*pte));
+		BUG_ON(!pte_none(get_pte(pte)));
 		set_pte(pte, pfn_pte(pfn, __pgprot(_PAGE_PRESENT | _PAGE_RW | 
 					_PAGE_DIRTY | _PAGE_ACCESSED | flags)));
 		pfn++;
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/pageattr.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/pageattr.c	2006-03-12 19:49:53.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/pageattr.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -24,15 +24,15 @@ pte_t *lookup_address(unsigned long addr
 	pgd_t *pgd = pgd_offset_k(address);
 	pud_t *pud;
 	pmd_t *pmd;
-	if (pgd_none(*pgd))
+	if (pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd)))
 		return NULL;
 	pud = pud_offset(pgd, address);
-	if (pud_none(*pud))
+	if (pud_none(get_pud(pud)))
 		return NULL;
 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, address);
-	if (pmd_none(*pmd))
+	if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd)))
 		return NULL;
-	if (pmd_large(*pmd))
+	if (pmd_large(get_pmd(pmd)))
 		return (pte_t *)pmd;
         return pte_offset_kernel(pmd, address);
 } 
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ __change_page_attr(struct page *page, pg
 		return -EINVAL;
 	kpte_page = virt_to_page(kpte);
 	if (pgprot_val(prot) != pgprot_val(PAGE_KERNEL)) { 
-		if ((pte_val(*kpte) & _PAGE_PSE) == 0) { 
+		if ((pte_val(get_pte(kpte)) & _PAGE_PSE) == 0) { 
 			set_pte_atomic(kpte, mk_pte(page, prot)); 
 		} else {
 			pgprot_t ref_prot;
@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ __change_page_attr(struct page *page, pg
 			kpte_page = split;
 		}	
 		get_page(kpte_page);
-	} else if ((pte_val(*kpte) & _PAGE_PSE) == 0) { 
+	} else if ((pte_val(get_pte(kpte)) & _PAGE_PSE) == 0) { 
 		set_pte_atomic(kpte, mk_pte(page, PAGE_KERNEL));
 		__put_page(kpte_page);
 	} else
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/pgtable.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/arch/i386/mm/pgtable.c	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/arch/i386/mm/pgtable.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -78,17 +78,17 @@ static void set_pte_pfn(unsigned long va
 	pte_t *pte;
 
 	pgd = swapper_pg_dir + pgd_index(vaddr);
-	if (pgd_none(*pgd)) {
+	if (pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd))) {
 		BUG();
 		return;
 	}
 	pud = pud_offset(pgd, vaddr);
-	if (pud_none(*pud)) {
+	if (pud_none(get_pud(pud))) {
 		BUG();
 		return;
 	}
 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, vaddr);
-	if (pmd_none(*pmd)) {
+	if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd))) {
 		BUG();
 		return;
 	}
@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ void set_pmd_pfn(unsigned long vaddr, un
 		return; /* BUG(); */
 	}
 	pgd = swapper_pg_dir + pgd_index(vaddr);
-	if (pgd_none(*pgd)) {
+	if (pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd))) {
 		printk(KERN_WARNING "set_pmd_pfn: pgd_none\n");
 		return; /* BUG(); */
 	}
@@ -267,8 +267,9 @@ pgd_t *pgd_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm)
 
 out_oom:
 	for (i--; i >= 0; i--) {
-		mach_release_pmd(pgd_val(pgd[i]) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
-		kmem_cache_free(pmd_cache, (void *)__va(pgd_val(pgd[i])-1));
+		pgd_t pgdent = get_pgd(&pgd[i]);
+		mach_release_pmd(pgd_val(pgdent) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
+		kmem_cache_free(pmd_cache, (void *)__va(pgd_val(pgdent)-1));
 	}
 	mach_release_pgd(__pa(pgd) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
 	kmem_cache_free(pgd_cache, pgd);
@@ -282,8 +283,9 @@ void pgd_free(pgd_t *pgd)
 	/* in the PAE case user pgd entries are overwritten before usage */
 	if (PTRS_PER_PMD > 1) {
 		for (i = 0; i < USER_PTRS_PER_PGD; ++i) {
-			mach_release_pmd(pgd_val(pgd[i]) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
-			kmem_cache_free(pmd_cache, (void *)__va(pgd_val(pgd[i])-1));
+			pgd_t pgdent = get_pgd(&pgd[i]);
+			mach_release_pmd(pgd_val(pgdent) >> PAGE_SHIFT);
+			kmem_cache_free(pmd_cache, (void *)__va(pgd_val(pgdent)-1));
 		}
 	}
 	/* in the non-PAE case, clear_page_range() clears user pgd entries */
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/fs/exec.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/fs/exec.c	2006-03-12 19:49:57.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/fs/exec.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ void install_arg_page(struct vm_area_str
 	pte = get_locked_pte(mm, address, &ptl);
 	if (!pte)
 		goto out;
-	if (!pte_none(*pte)) {
+	if (!pte_none(get_pte(pte))) {
 		pte_unmap_unlock(pte, ptl);
 		goto out;
 	}
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/fs/proc/task_mmu.c	2006-03-12 19:49:57.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/fs/proc/task_mmu.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -208,7 +208,7 @@ static void smaps_pte_range(struct vm_ar
 
 	pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
 	do {
-		ptent = *pte;
+		ptent = get_pte(pte);
 		if (!pte_present(ptent))
 			continue;
 
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-generic/pgtable.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-generic/pgtable.h	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-generic/pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -1,6 +1,22 @@
 #ifndef _ASM_GENERIC_PGTABLE_H
 #define _ASM_GENERIC_PGTABLE_H
 
+#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PTE
+#define get_pte(__ptep) (*(__ptep))
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PMD
+#define get_pmd(__pmdp) (*(__pmdp))
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PUD
+#define get_pud(__pudp) (*(__pudp))
+#endif
+
+#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PGD
+#define get_pgd(__pgdp) (*(__pgdp))
+#endif
+
 #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_ESTABLISH
 /*
  * Establish a new mapping:
@@ -45,7 +61,7 @@ do {				  					  \
 #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_YOUNG
 #define ptep_test_and_clear_young(__vma, __address, __ptep)		\
 ({									\
-	pte_t __pte = *(__ptep);					\
+	pte_t __pte = get_pte(__ptep);		                        \
 	int r = 1;							\
 	if (!pte_young(__pte))						\
 		r = 0;							\
@@ -70,7 +86,7 @@ do {				  					  \
 #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_DIRTY
 #define ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(__vma, __address, __ptep)		\
 ({									\
-	pte_t __pte = *__ptep;						\
+	pte_t __pte = get_pte(__ptep);					\
 	int r = 1;							\
 	if (!pte_dirty(__pte))						\
 		r = 0;							\
@@ -95,7 +111,7 @@ do {				  					  \
 #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_GET_AND_CLEAR
 #define ptep_get_and_clear(__mm, __address, __ptep)			\
 ({									\
-	pte_t __pte = *(__ptep);					\
+	pte_t __pte = get_pte(__ptep);					\
 	pte_clear((__mm), (__address), (__ptep));			\
 	__pte;								\
 })
@@ -131,7 +147,7 @@ do {									\
 struct mm_struct;
 static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long address, pte_t *ptep)
 {
-	pte_t old_pte = *ptep;
+	pte_t old_pte = get_pte(ptep);
 	set_pte_at(mm, address, ptep, pte_wrprotect(old_pte));
 }
 #endif
@@ -209,9 +225,9 @@ void pmd_clear_bad(pmd_t *);
 
 static inline int pgd_none_or_clear_bad(pgd_t *pgd)
 {
-	if (pgd_none(*pgd))
+	if (pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd)))
 		return 1;
-	if (unlikely(pgd_bad(*pgd))) {
+	if (unlikely(pgd_bad(get_pgd(pgd)))) {
 		pgd_clear_bad(pgd);
 		return 1;
 	}
@@ -220,9 +236,9 @@ static inline int pgd_none_or_clear_bad(
 
 static inline int pud_none_or_clear_bad(pud_t *pud)
 {
-	if (pud_none(*pud))
+	if (pud_none(get_pud(pud)))
 		return 1;
-	if (unlikely(pud_bad(*pud))) {
+	if (unlikely(pud_bad(get_pud(pud)))) {
 		pud_clear_bad(pud);
 		return 1;
 	}
@@ -231,9 +247,9 @@ static inline int pud_none_or_clear_bad(
 
 static inline int pmd_none_or_clear_bad(pmd_t *pmd)
 {
-	if (pmd_none(*pmd))
+	if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd)))
 		return 1;
-	if (unlikely(pmd_bad(*pmd))) {
+	if (unlikely(pmd_bad(get_pmd(pmd)))) {
 		pmd_clear_bad(pmd);
 		return 1;
 	}
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/pgalloc.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/pgalloc.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/pgalloc.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -4,9 +4,10 @@
 #include <linux/config.h>
 #include <asm/fixmap.h>
 #include <linux/threads.h>
-#include <linux/mm.h>		/* for struct page */
 #include <mach_pgalloc.h>
 
+struct page;
+
 #define pmd_populate_kernel(mm, pmd, pte) 			\
 do {								\
 	mach_setup_pte(__pa(pte) >> PAGE_SHIFT);		\
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/pgtable-3level.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/pgtable-3level.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/pgtable-3level.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ static inline int pte_exec_kernel(pte_t 
 
 
 /* Find an entry in the second-level page table.. */
-#define pmd_offset(pud, address) ((pmd_t *) pud_page(*(pud)) + \
+#define pmd_offset(pud, address) ((pmd_t *) pud_page(get_pud(pud)) + \
 			pmd_index(address))
 
 static inline int pte_same(pte_t a, pte_t b)
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -260,14 +260,14 @@ static inline pte_t pte_mkhuge(pte_t pte
 #ifndef __HAVE_SUBARCH_PTE_WRITE_FUNCTIONS
 static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_dirty(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
 {
-	if (!pte_dirty(*ptep))
+	if (!pte_dirty(get_pte(ptep)))
 		return 0;
 	return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &ptep->pte_low);
 }
  
 static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
 {
-	if (!pte_young(*ptep))
+	if (!pte_young(get_pte(ptep)))
 		return 0;
 	return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &ptep->pte_low);
 }
@@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ static inline pte_t ptep_get_and_clear_f
 {
 	pte_t pte;
 	if (full) {
-		pte = *ptep;
+		pte = get_pte(ptep);
 		*ptep = __pte(0);
 	} else {
 		pte = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, ptep);
@@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static inline pte_t pte_modify(pte_t pte
 #define pte_index(address) \
 		(((address) >> PAGE_SHIFT) & (PTRS_PER_PTE - 1))
 #define pte_offset_kernel(dir, address) \
-	((pte_t *) pmd_page_kernel(*(dir)) +  pte_index(address))
+	((pte_t *) pmd_page_kernel(get_pmd(dir)) +  pte_index(address))
 
 #define pmd_page(pmd) (pfn_to_page(pmd_val(pmd) >> PAGE_SHIFT))
 
@@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ extern void noexec_setup(const char *str
 #define pte_offset_map(dir, address) 					\
 ({									\
 	pte_t *__ptep;							\
-	unsigned pfn = pmd_val(*dir) >> PAGE_SHIFT;			\
+	unsigned pfn = pmd_val(get_pmd(dir)) >> PAGE_SHIFT;		\
 	__ptep = (pte_t *)kmap_atomic(pfn_to_page(pfn),KM_PTE0);	\
 	mach_map_linear_pt(0, __ptep, pfn);				\
 	__ptep = __ptep + pte_index(address);				\
@@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ extern void noexec_setup(const char *str
 #define pte_offset_map_nested(dir, address) 				\
 ({									\
 	pte_t *__ptep;							\
-	unsigned pfn = pmd_val(*dir) >> PAGE_SHIFT;			\
+	unsigned pfn = pmd_val(get_pmd(dir)) >> PAGE_SHIFT;		\
 	__ptep = (pte_t *)kmap_atomic(pfn_to_page(pfn),KM_PTE1);	\
 	mach_map_linear_pt(1, __ptep, pfn);				\
 	__ptep = __ptep + pte_index(address);				\
@@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ extern void noexec_setup(const char *str
 #define pte_unmap_nested(pte) kunmap_atomic(pte, KM_PTE1)
 #else
 #define pte_offset_map(dir, address) \
-	((pte_t *)page_address(pmd_page(*(dir))) + pte_index(address))
+	((pte_t *)page_address(pmd_page(get_pmd(dir))) + pte_index(address))
 #define pte_offset_map_nested(dir, address) pte_offset_map(dir, address)
 #define pte_unmap(pte) do { } while (0)
 #define pte_unmap_nested(pte) do { } while (0)
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-default/mach_pgtable.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/mach-default/mach_pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-default/mach_pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -1,6 +1,18 @@
 #ifndef _MACH_PGTABLE_H
 #define _MACH_PGTABLE_H
 
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PTE
+#define get_pte(__ptep) (*(__ptep))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PMD
+#define get_pmd(__pmdp) (*(__pmdp))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PUD
+#define get_pud(__pudp) (*(__pudp))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PGD
+#define get_pgd(__pgdp) (*(__pgdp))
+
 /*
  * The i386 doesn't have any external MMU info: the kernel page
  * tables contain all the necessary information.
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/mach_pgtable.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/mach_pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/mach_pgtable.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static inline pte_t ptep_get_and_clear_f
 {
 	pte_t pte;
 	if (full) {
-		pte = *ptep;
+		pte = get_pte(ptep);
 		*ptep = __pte(0);
 	} else {
 		pte = ptep_get_and_clear(mm, addr, ptep);
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/pgtable-2level-ops.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/pgtable-2level-ops.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/pgtable-2level-ops.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -26,6 +26,18 @@
 #ifndef _MACH_PGTABLE_LEVEL_OPS_H
 #define _MACH_PGTABLE_LEVEL_OPS_H
 
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PTE
+#define get_pte(__ptep) (*(__ptep))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PMD
+#define get_pmd(__pmdp) (*(__pmdp))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PUD
+#define get_pud(__pudp) (*(__pudp))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PGD
+#define get_pgd(__pgdp) (*(__pgdp))
+
 /*
  * Certain architectures need to do special things when PTEs
  * within a page table are directly modified.  Thus, the following
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/pgtable-3level-ops.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/pgtable-3level-ops.h	2006-03-12 19:57:39.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/asm-i386/mach-vmi/pgtable-3level-ops.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -1,6 +1,18 @@
 #ifndef _MACH_PGTABLE_LEVEL_OPS_H
 #define _MACH_PGTABLE_LEVEL_OPS_H
 
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PTE
+#define get_pte(__ptep) (*(__ptep))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PMD
+#define get_pmd(__pmdp) (*(__pmdp))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PUD
+#define get_pud(__pudp) (*(__pudp))
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_GET_PGD
+#define get_pgd(__pgdp) (*(__pgdp))
+
 /* Rules for using set_pte: the pte being assigned *must* be
  * either not present or in a state where the hardware will
  * not attempt to update the pte.  In places where this is
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/linux/mm.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/include/linux/mm.h	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/include/linux/mm.h	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -802,13 +802,13 @@ int __pte_alloc_kernel(pmd_t *pmd, unsig
 #if defined(CONFIG_MMU) && !defined(__ARCH_HAS_4LEVEL_HACK)
 static inline pud_t *pud_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, pgd_t *pgd, unsigned long address)
 {
-	return (unlikely(pgd_none(*pgd)) && __pud_alloc(mm, pgd, address))?
+	return (unlikely(pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd))) && __pud_alloc(mm, pgd, address))?
 		NULL: pud_offset(pgd, address);
 }
 
 static inline pmd_t *pmd_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, pud_t *pud, unsigned long address)
 {
-	return (unlikely(pud_none(*pud)) && __pmd_alloc(mm, pud, address))?
+	return (unlikely(pud_none(get_pud(pud))) && __pmd_alloc(mm, pud, address))?
 		NULL: pmd_offset(pud, address);
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_MMU && !__ARCH_HAS_4LEVEL_HACK */
@@ -825,7 +825,7 @@ static inline pmd_t *pmd_alloc(struct mm
 	spin_lock_init(__pte_lockptr(_page));				\
 } while (0)
 #define pte_lock_deinit(page)	((page)->mapping = NULL)
-#define pte_lockptr(mm, pmd)	({(void)(mm); __pte_lockptr(pmd_page(*(pmd)));})
+#define pte_lockptr(mm, pmd)	({(void)(mm); __pte_lockptr(pmd_page(get_pmd(pmd)));})
 #else
 /*
  * We use mm->page_table_lock to guard all pagetable pages of the mm.
@@ -850,15 +850,15 @@ static inline pmd_t *pmd_alloc(struct mm
 } while (0)
 
 #define pte_alloc_map(mm, pmd, address)			\
-	((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, address))? \
+	((unlikely(!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, address))? \
 		NULL: pte_offset_map(pmd, address))
 
 #define pte_alloc_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, ptlp)	\
-	((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, address))? \
+	((unlikely(!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd))) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, address))? \
 		NULL: pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, ptlp))
 
 #define pte_alloc_kernel(pmd, address)			\
-	((unlikely(!pmd_present(*(pmd))) && __pte_alloc_kernel(pmd, address))? \
+	((unlikely(!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd))) && __pte_alloc_kernel(pmd, address))? \
 		NULL: pte_offset_kernel(pmd, address))
 
 extern void free_area_init(unsigned long * zones_size);
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/fremap.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/fremap.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/fremap.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
 static int zap_pte(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
 {
-	pte_t pte = *ptep;
+	pte_t pte = get_pte(ptep);
 	struct page *page = NULL;
 
 	if (pte_present(pte)) {
@@ -75,13 +75,13 @@ int install_page(struct mm_struct *mm, s
 	if (page_mapcount(page) > INT_MAX/2)
 		goto unlock;
 
-	if (pte_none(*pte) || !zap_pte(mm, vma, addr, pte))
+	if (pte_none(get_pte(pte)) || !zap_pte(mm, vma, addr, pte))
 		inc_mm_counter(mm, file_rss);
 
 	flush_icache_page(vma, page);
 	set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, mk_pte(page, prot));
 	page_add_file_rmap(page);
-	pte_val = *pte;
+	pte_val = get_pte(pte);
 	update_mmu_cache(vma, addr, pte_val);
 	err = 0;
 unlock:
@@ -107,13 +107,13 @@ int install_file_pte(struct mm_struct *m
 	if (!pte)
 		goto out;
 
-	if (!pte_none(*pte) && zap_pte(mm, vma, addr, pte)) {
+	if (!pte_none(get_pte(pte)) && zap_pte(mm, vma, addr, pte)) {
 		update_hiwater_rss(mm);
 		dec_mm_counter(mm, file_rss);
 	}
 
 	set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, pgoff_to_pte(pgoff));
-	pte_val = *pte;
+	pte_val = get_pte(pte);
 	update_mmu_cache(vma, addr, pte_val);
 	pte_unmap_unlock(pte, ptl);
 	err = 0;
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/highmem.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/highmem.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/highmem.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void flush_all_zero_pkmaps(void)
 		pkmap_count[i] = 0;
 
 		/* sanity check */
-		if (pte_none(pkmap_page_table[i]))
+		if (pte_none(get_pte(&pkmap_page_table[i])))
 			BUG();
 
 		/*
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static void flush_all_zero_pkmaps(void)
 		 * getting the kmap_lock (which is held here).
 		 * So no dangers, even with speculative execution.
 		 */
-		page = pte_page(pkmap_page_table[i]);
+		page = pte_page(get_pte(&pkmap_page_table[i]));
 		pte_clear(&init_mm, (unsigned long)page_address(page),
 			  &pkmap_page_table[i]);
 
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/hugetlb.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/hugetlb.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/hugetlb.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ static void set_huge_ptep_writable(struc
 {
 	pte_t entry;
 
-	entry = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(*ptep));
+	entry = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(get_pte(ptep)));
 	ptep_set_access_flags(vma, address, ptep, entry, 1);
 	update_mmu_cache(vma, address, entry);
 	lazy_mmu_prot_update(entry);
@@ -316,10 +316,10 @@ int copy_hugetlb_page_range(struct mm_st
 			goto nomem;
 		spin_lock(&dst->page_table_lock);
 		spin_lock(&src->page_table_lock);
-		if (!pte_none(*src_pte)) {
+		if (!pte_none(get_pte(src_pte))) {
 			if (cow)
 				ptep_set_wrprotect(src, addr, src_pte);
-			entry = *src_pte;
+			entry = get_pte(src_pte);
 			ptepage = pte_page(entry);
 			get_page(ptepage);
 			add_mm_counter(dst, file_rss, HPAGE_SIZE / PAGE_SIZE);
@@ -401,7 +401,7 @@ static int hugetlb_cow(struct mm_struct 
 	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
 
 	ptep = huge_pte_offset(mm, address & HPAGE_MASK);
-	if (likely(pte_same(*ptep, pte))) {
+	if (likely(pte_same(get_pte(ptep), pte))) {
 		/* Break COW */
 		set_huge_pte_at(mm, address, ptep,
 				make_huge_pte(vma, new_page, 1));
@@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ retry:
 		goto backout;
 
 	ret = VM_FAULT_MINOR;
-	if (!pte_none(*ptep))
+	if (!pte_none(get_pte(ptep)))
 		goto backout;
 
 	add_mm_counter(mm, file_rss, HPAGE_SIZE / PAGE_SIZE);
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@ int hugetlb_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, 
 	if (!ptep)
 		return VM_FAULT_OOM;
 
-	entry = *ptep;
+	entry = get_pte(ptep);
 	if (pte_none(entry))
 		return hugetlb_no_page(mm, vma, address, ptep, write_access);
 
@@ -509,7 +509,7 @@ int hugetlb_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, 
 
 	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
 	/* Check for a racing update before calling hugetlb_cow */
-	if (likely(pte_same(entry, *ptep)))
+	if (likely(pte_same(entry, get_pte(ptep))))
 		if (write_access && !pte_write(entry))
 			ret = hugetlb_cow(mm, vma, address, ptep, entry);
 	spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
@@ -537,7 +537,7 @@ int follow_hugetlb_page(struct mm_struct
 		 */
 		pte = huge_pte_offset(mm, vaddr & HPAGE_MASK);
 
-		if (!pte || pte_none(*pte)) {
+		if (!pte || pte_none(get_pte(pte))) {
 			int ret;
 
 			spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
@@ -553,7 +553,7 @@ int follow_hugetlb_page(struct mm_struct
 		}
 
 		if (pages) {
-			page = &pte_page(*pte)[vpfn % (HPAGE_SIZE/PAGE_SIZE)];
+			page = &pte_page(get_pte(pte))[vpfn % (HPAGE_SIZE/PAGE_SIZE)];
 			get_page(page);
 			pages[i] = page;
 		}
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/memory.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/memory.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/memory.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -100,19 +100,19 @@ __setup("norandmaps", disable_randmaps);
 
 void pgd_clear_bad(pgd_t *pgd)
 {
-	pgd_ERROR(*pgd);
+	pgd_ERROR(get_pgd(pgd));
 	pgd_clear(pgd);
 }
 
 void pud_clear_bad(pud_t *pud)
 {
-	pud_ERROR(*pud);
+	pud_ERROR(get_pud(pud));
 	pud_clear(pud);
 }
 
 void pmd_clear_bad(pmd_t *pmd)
 {
-	pmd_ERROR(*pmd);
+	pmd_ERROR(get_pmd(pmd));
 	pmd_clear(pmd);
 }
 
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ void pmd_clear_bad(pmd_t *pmd)
  */
 static void free_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb, pmd_t *pmd)
 {
-	struct page *page = pmd_page(*pmd);
+	struct page *page = pmd_page(get_pmd(pmd));
 	pmd_clear(pmd);
 	pte_lock_deinit(page);
 	pte_free_tlb(tlb, page);
@@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ int __pte_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, pm
 
 	pte_lock_init(new);
 	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
-	if (pmd_present(*pmd)) {	/* Another has populated it */
+	if (pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd))) {	/* Another has populated it */
 		pte_lock_deinit(new);
 		pte_free(new);
 	} else {
@@ -326,7 +326,7 @@ int __pte_alloc_kernel(pmd_t *pmd, unsig
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	spin_lock(&init_mm.page_table_lock);
-	if (pmd_present(*pmd))		/* Another has populated it */
+	if (pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd)))		/* Another has populated it */
 		pte_free_kernel(new);
 	else
 		pmd_populate_kernel(&init_mm, pmd, new);
@@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ copy_one_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, s
 		unsigned long addr, int *rss)
 {
 	unsigned long vm_flags = vma->vm_flags;
-	pte_t pte = *src_pte;
+	pte_t pte = get_pte(src_pte);
 	struct page *page;
 
 	/* pte contains position in swap or file, so copy. */
@@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ copy_one_pte(struct mm_struct *dst_mm, s
 	 */
 	if (is_cow_mapping(vm_flags)) {
 		ptep_set_wrprotect(src_mm, addr, src_pte);
-		pte = *src_pte;
+		pte = get_pte(src_pte);
 	}
 
 	/*
@@ -508,7 +508,7 @@ again:
 			    need_lockbreak(dst_ptl))
 				break;
 		}
-		if (pte_none(*src_pte)) {
+		if (pte_none(get_pte(src_pte))) {
 			progress++;
 			continue;
 		}
@@ -618,7 +618,7 @@ static unsigned long zap_pte_range(struc
 
 	pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
 	do {
-		pte_t ptent = *pte;
+		pte_t ptent = get_pte(pte);
 		if (pte_none(ptent)) {
 			(*zap_work)--;
 			continue;
@@ -903,18 +903,18 @@ struct page *follow_page(struct vm_area_
 
 	page = NULL;
 	pgd = pgd_offset(mm, address);
-	if (pgd_none(*pgd) || unlikely(pgd_bad(*pgd)))
+	if (pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd)) || unlikely(pgd_bad(get_pgd(pgd))))
 		goto no_page_table;
 
 	pud = pud_offset(pgd, address);
-	if (pud_none(*pud) || unlikely(pud_bad(*pud)))
+	if (pud_none(get_pud(pud)) || unlikely(pud_bad(get_pud(pud))))
 		goto no_page_table;
 	
 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, address);
-	if (pmd_none(*pmd) || unlikely(pmd_bad(*pmd)))
+	if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd)) || unlikely(pmd_bad(get_pmd(pmd))))
 		goto no_page_table;
 
-	if (pmd_huge(*pmd)) {
+	if (pmd_huge(get_pmd(pmd))) {
 		BUG_ON(flags & FOLL_GET);
 		page = follow_huge_pmd(mm, address, pmd, flags & FOLL_WRITE);
 		goto out;
@@ -924,7 +924,7 @@ struct page *follow_page(struct vm_area_
 	if (!ptep)
 		goto out;
 
-	pte = *ptep;
+	pte = get_pte(ptep);
 	if (!pte_present(pte))
 		goto unlock;
 	if ((flags & FOLL_WRITE) && !pte_write(pte))
@@ -993,19 +993,19 @@ int get_user_pages(struct task_struct *t
 				pgd = pgd_offset_k(pg);
 			else
 				pgd = pgd_offset_gate(mm, pg);
-			BUG_ON(pgd_none(*pgd));
+			BUG_ON(pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd)));
 			pud = pud_offset(pgd, pg);
-			BUG_ON(pud_none(*pud));
+			BUG_ON(pud_none(get_pud(pud)));
 			pmd = pmd_offset(pud, pg);
-			if (pmd_none(*pmd))
+			if (pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd)))
 				return i ? : -EFAULT;
 			pte = pte_offset_map(pmd, pg);
-			if (pte_none(*pte)) {
+			if (pte_none(get_pte(pte))) {
 				pte_unmap(pte);
 				return i ? : -EFAULT;
 			}
 			if (pages) {
-				struct page *page = vm_normal_page(gate_vma, start, *pte);
+				struct page *page = vm_normal_page(gate_vma, start, get_pte(pte));
 				pages[i] = page;
 				if (page)
 					get_page(page);
@@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ static int zeromap_pte_range(struct mm_s
 		page_cache_get(page);
 		page_add_file_rmap(page);
 		inc_mm_counter(mm, file_rss);
-		BUG_ON(!pte_none(*pte));
+		BUG_ON(!pte_none(get_pte(pte)));
 		set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, zero_pte);
 	} while (pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE, addr != end);
 	pte_unmap_unlock(pte - 1, ptl);
@@ -1197,7 +1197,7 @@ static int insert_page(struct mm_struct 
 	if (!pte)
 		goto out;
 	retval = -EBUSY;
-	if (!pte_none(*pte))
+	if (!pte_none(get_pte(pte)))
 		goto out_unlock;
 
 	/* Ok, finally just insert the thing.. */
@@ -1259,7 +1259,7 @@ static int remap_pte_range(struct mm_str
 	if (!pte)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	do {
-		BUG_ON(!pte_none(*pte));
+		BUG_ON(!pte_none(get_pte(pte)));
 		set_pte_at(mm, addr, pte, pfn_pte(pfn, prot));
 		pfn++;
 	} while (pte++, addr += PAGE_SIZE, addr != end);
@@ -1375,7 +1375,7 @@ static inline int pte_unmap_same(struct 
 	if (sizeof(pte_t) > sizeof(unsigned long)) {
 		spinlock_t *ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
 		spin_lock(ptl);
-		same = pte_same(*page_table, orig_pte);
+		same = pte_same(get_pte(page_table), orig_pte);
 		spin_unlock(ptl);
 	}
 #endif
@@ -1492,7 +1492,7 @@ gotten:
 	 * Re-check the pte - we dropped the lock
 	 */
 	page_table = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
-	if (likely(pte_same(*page_table, orig_pte))) {
+	if (likely(pte_same(get_pte(page_table), orig_pte))) {
 		if (old_page) {
 			page_remove_rmap(old_page);
 			if (!PageAnon(old_page)) {
@@ -1892,7 +1892,7 @@ again:
 			 * while we released the pte lock.
 			 */
 			page_table = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
-			if (likely(pte_same(*page_table, orig_pte)))
+			if (likely(pte_same(get_pte(page_table), orig_pte)))
 				ret = VM_FAULT_OOM;
 			goto unlock;
 		}
@@ -1916,7 +1916,7 @@ again:
 	 * Back out if somebody else already faulted in this pte.
 	 */
 	page_table = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
-	if (unlikely(!pte_same(*page_table, orig_pte)))
+	if (unlikely(!pte_same(get_pte(page_table), orig_pte)))
 		goto out_nomap;
 
 	if (unlikely(!PageUptodate(page))) {
@@ -1990,7 +1990,7 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_s
 		entry = maybe_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(entry), vma);
 
 		page_table = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
-		if (!pte_none(*page_table))
+		if (!pte_none(get_pte(page_table)))
 			goto release;
 		inc_mm_counter(mm, anon_rss);
 		lru_cache_add_active(page);
@@ -2003,7 +2003,7 @@ static int do_anonymous_page(struct mm_s
 
 		ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
 		spin_lock(ptl);
-		if (!pte_none(*page_table))
+		if (!pte_none(get_pte(page_table)))
 			goto release;
 		inc_mm_counter(mm, file_rss);
 		page_add_file_rmap(page);
@@ -2116,7 +2116,7 @@ retry:
 	 * handle that later.
 	 */
 	/* Only go through if we didn't race with anybody else... */
-	if (pte_none(*page_table)) {
+	if (pte_none(get_pte(page_table))) {
 		flush_icache_page(vma, new_page);
 		entry = mk_pte(new_page, vma->vm_page_prot);
 		if (write_access)
@@ -2206,7 +2206,7 @@ static inline int handle_pte_fault(struc
 	pte_t old_entry;
 	spinlock_t *ptl;
 
-	old_entry = entry = *pte;
+	old_entry = entry = get_pte(pte);
 	if (!pte_present(entry)) {
 		if (pte_none(entry)) {
 			if (!vma->vm_ops || !vma->vm_ops->nopage)
@@ -2224,7 +2224,7 @@ static inline int handle_pte_fault(struc
 
 	ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
 	spin_lock(ptl);
-	if (unlikely(!pte_same(*pte, entry)))
+	if (unlikely(!pte_same(get_pte(pte), entry)))
 		goto unlock;
 	if (write_access) {
 		if (!pte_write(entry))
@@ -2298,7 +2298,7 @@ int __pud_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, pg
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
-	if (pgd_present(*pgd))		/* Another has populated it */
+	if (pgd_present(get_pgd(pgd)))		/* Another has populated it */
 		pud_free(new);
 	else
 		pgd_populate(mm, pgd, new);
@@ -2326,12 +2326,12 @@ int __pmd_alloc(struct mm_struct *mm, pu
 
 	spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
 #ifndef __ARCH_HAS_4LEVEL_HACK
-	if (pud_present(*pud))		/* Another has populated it */
+	if (pud_present(get_pud(pud)))		/* Another has populated it */
 		pmd_free(new);
 	else
 		pud_populate(mm, pud, new);
 #else
-	if (pgd_present(*pud))		/* Another has populated it */
+	if (pgd_present(get_pud(pud)))		/* Another has populated it */
 		pmd_free(new);
 	else
 		pgd_populate(mm, pud, new);
@@ -2380,13 +2380,13 @@ struct page * vmalloc_to_page(void * vma
 	pmd_t *pmd;
 	pte_t *ptep, pte;
   
-	if (!pgd_none(*pgd)) {
+	if (!pgd_none(get_pgd(pgd))) {
 		pud = pud_offset(pgd, addr);
-		if (!pud_none(*pud)) {
+		if (!pud_none(get_pud(pud))) {
 			pmd = pmd_offset(pud, addr);
-			if (!pmd_none(*pmd)) {
+			if (!pmd_none(get_pmd(pmd))) {
 				ptep = pte_offset_map(pmd, addr);
-				pte = *ptep;
+				pte = get_pte(ptep);
 				if (pte_present(pte))
 					page = pte_page(pte);
 				pte_unmap(ptep);
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/mempolicy.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/mempolicy.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/mempolicy.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -216,9 +216,9 @@ static int check_pte_range(struct vm_are
 		struct page *page;
 		unsigned int nid;
 
-		if (!pte_present(*pte))
+		if (!pte_present(get_pte(pte)))
 			continue;
-		page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, *pte);
+		page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, get_pte(pte));
 		if (!page)
 			continue;
 		/*
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/mprotect.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/mprotect.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/mprotect.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ static void change_pte_range(struct mm_s
 
 	pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, addr, &ptl);
 	do {
-		if (pte_present(*pte)) {
+		if (pte_present(get_pte(pte))) {
 			pte_t ptent;
 
 			/* Avoid an SMP race with hardware updated dirty/clean
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/mremap.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/mremap.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/mremap.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ static pmd_t *alloc_new_pmd(struct mm_st
 	if (!pmd)
 		return NULL;
 
-	if (!pmd_present(*pmd) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, addr))
+	if (!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd)) && __pte_alloc(mm, pmd, addr))
 		return NULL;
 
 	return pmd;
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static void move_ptes(struct vm_area_str
 
 	for (; old_addr < old_end; old_pte++, old_addr += PAGE_SIZE,
 				   new_pte++, new_addr += PAGE_SIZE) {
-		if (pte_none(*old_pte))
+		if (pte_none(get_pte(old_pte)))
 			continue;
 		pte = ptep_clear_flush(vma, old_addr, old_pte);
 		/* ZERO_PAGE can be dependant on virtual addr */
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/msync.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/msync.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/msync.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -35,11 +35,11 @@ again:
 				break;
 		}
 		progress++;
-		if (!pte_present(*pte))
+		if (!pte_present(get_pte(pte)))
 			continue;
-		if (!pte_maybe_dirty(*pte))
+		if (!pte_maybe_dirty(get_pte(pte)))
 			continue;
-		page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, *pte);
+		page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, get_pte(pte));
 		if (!page)
 			continue;
 		if (ptep_clear_flush_dirty(vma, addr, pte) ||
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/rmap.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/rmap.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/rmap.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -296,27 +296,27 @@ pte_t *page_check_address(struct page *p
 	spinlock_t *ptl;
 
 	pgd = pgd_offset(mm, address);
-	if (!pgd_present(*pgd))
+	if (!pgd_present(get_pgd(pgd)))
 		return NULL;
 
 	pud = pud_offset(pgd, address);
-	if (!pud_present(*pud))
+	if (!pud_present(get_pud(pud)))
 		return NULL;
 
 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, address);
-	if (!pmd_present(*pmd))
+	if (!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd)))
 		return NULL;
 
 	pte = pte_offset_map(pmd, address);
 	/* Make a quick check before getting the lock */
-	if (!pte_present(*pte)) {
+	if (!pte_present(get_pte(pte))) {
 		pte_unmap(pte);
 		return NULL;
 	}
 
 	ptl = pte_lockptr(mm, pmd);
 	spin_lock(ptl);
-	if (pte_present(*pte) && page_to_pfn(page) == pte_pfn(*pte)) {
+	if (pte_present(get_pte(pte)) && page_to_pfn(page) == pte_pfn(get_pte(pte))) {
 		*ptlp = ptl;
 		return pte;
 	}
@@ -633,7 +633,7 @@ static int try_to_unmap_one(struct page 
 			spin_unlock(&mmlist_lock);
 		}
 		set_pte_at(mm, address, pte, swp_entry_to_pte(entry));
-		BUG_ON(pte_file(*pte));
+		BUG_ON(pte_file(get_pte(pte)));
 		dec_mm_counter(mm, anon_rss);
 	} else
 		dec_mm_counter(mm, file_rss);
@@ -691,15 +691,15 @@ static void try_to_unmap_cluster(unsigne
 		end = vma->vm_end;
 
 	pgd = pgd_offset(mm, address);
-	if (!pgd_present(*pgd))
+	if (!pgd_present(get_pgd(pgd)))
 		return;
 
 	pud = pud_offset(pgd, address);
-	if (!pud_present(*pud))
+	if (!pud_present(get_pud(pud)))
 		return;
 
 	pmd = pmd_offset(pud, address);
-	if (!pmd_present(*pmd))
+	if (!pmd_present(get_pmd(pmd)))
 		return;
 
 	pte = pte_offset_map_lock(mm, pmd, address, &ptl);
@@ -708,9 +708,9 @@ static void try_to_unmap_cluster(unsigne
 	update_hiwater_rss(mm);
 
 	for (; address < end; pte++, address += PAGE_SIZE) {
-		if (!pte_present(*pte))
+		if (!pte_present(get_pte(pte)))
 			continue;
-		page = vm_normal_page(vma, address, *pte);
+		page = vm_normal_page(vma, address, get_pte(pte));
 		BUG_ON(!page || PageAnon(page));
 
 		if (ptep_clear_flush_young(vma, address, pte))
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/swapfile.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/swapfile.c	2006-03-12 19:49:58.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/swapfile.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ static int unuse_pte_range(struct vm_are
 		 * swapoff spends a _lot_ of time in this loop!
 		 * Test inline before going to call unuse_pte.
 		 */
-		if (unlikely(pte_same(*pte, swp_pte))) {
+		if (unlikely(pte_same(get_pte(pte), swp_pte))) {
 			unuse_pte(vma, pte++, addr, entry, page);
 			found = 1;
 			break;
Index: linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/vmalloc.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.16-rc6.orig/mm/vmalloc.c	2006-01-02 19:21:10.000000000 -0800
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc6/mm/vmalloc.c	2006-03-12 19:57:58.000000000 -0800
@@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ static int vmap_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, un
 		return -ENOMEM;
 	do {
 		struct page *page = **pages;
-		WARN_ON(!pte_none(*pte));
+		WARN_ON(!pte_none(get_pte(pte)));
 		if (!page)
 			return -ENOMEM;
 		set_pte_at(&init_mm, addr, pte, mk_pte(page, prot));

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 138 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Chris Wright]

* Ian Pratt (m+Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk) wrote:
> > Just some food for thought,  I did a simple analysis of the 
> > size of Xen Linux patches verses the VMI patches.  To make 
> > things more fair, I removed everything from the XenoLinux 
> > port accept for the i386 xen subarch (so no drivers and no 
> > support for other architectures).
> 
> Your analysis is still taking all the patches to make dom0 functionality
> work, which accounts for a lot of changes and is totally outside of the
> scope of VMI.
> 
> We've been working with a bunch of RH/Novell folks to create a stripped
> down domU-only Xen patch that would be a fairer comparison.

Here's a really imprecise view into that.  Keeping with Anthony's
metrics:

 88 files changed, 7637 insertions(+), 436 deletions(-)

That's near meaningless, as it's not something that would compile and
run, but gives you a scope of the size of the changes for domU only
(shadow mode), no Xen drivers, etc..

thanks,
-chris

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Anthony Liguori]

Chris Wright wrote:
> * Ian Pratt (m+Ian.Pratt@cl.cam.ac.uk) wrote:
>   
>>> Just some food for thought,  I did a simple analysis of the 
>>> size of Xen Linux patches verses the VMI patches.  To make 
>>> things more fair, I removed everything from the XenoLinux 
>>> port accept for the i386 xen subarch (so no drivers and no 
>>> support for other architectures).
>>>       
>> Your analysis is still taking all the patches to make dom0 functionality
>> work, which accounts for a lot of changes and is totally outside of the
>> scope of VMI.
>>
>> We've been working with a bunch of RH/Novell folks to create a stripped
>> down domU-only Xen patch that would be a fairer comparison.
>>     
>
> Here's a really imprecise view into that.  Keeping with Anthony's
> metrics:
>
>  88 files changed, 7637 insertions(+), 436 deletions(-)
>   
Interesting.
> That's near meaningless, as it's not something that would compile and
> run, but gives you a scope of the size of the changes for domU only
> (shadow mode), no Xen drivers, etc..
>   
Okay, but that is on par with the amount of changes present in VMI.  
That's a really interesting data point.

Thanks,

Anthony Liguori
> thanks,
> -chris
>   

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Keir Fraser]

On 17 Mar 2006, at 00:10, Anthony Liguori wrote:

>> That's near meaningless, as it's not something that would compile and
>> run, but gives you a scope of the size of the changes for domU only
>> (shadow mode), no Xen drivers, etc..
>>
> Okay, but that is on par with the amount of changes present in VMI.  
> That's a really interesting data point.

Omitting the Xen drivers will account for a fair bit of that reduction. 
Including those in the VMI comparison is unfair since the VMI 
interfaces consider core architectural subsystems, not I/O.

  -- Keir

Re: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Keir Fraser]

On 17 Mar 2006, at 08:53, Keir Fraser wrote:

>> Okay, but that is on par with the amount of changes present in VMI.  
>> That's a really interesting data point.
>
> Omitting the Xen drivers will account for a fair bit of that 
> reduction. Including those in the VMI comparison is unfair since the 
> VMI interfaces consider core architectural subsystems, not I/O.

Ah, you omitted them already. Duh. :-)

  -- Keir

RE: [RFC] VMI for Xen?

[Daniel Arai]

Ian Pratt wrote:

> The current VMI patchset couldn't support Xen's direct-mode (non shadow)
> MMU virtualization, and hasn't really been thought through properly for
> SMP. I'm sure we'll get something worked out that keeps everyone happy.

I'm not sure what you mean that VMI "hasn't really been thought through
properly for SMP."  I'm writing this email from an SMP VMI guest.

Using page table shadows makes an SMP implementation really easy.  Page
table writes can go directly to the virtual page tables.  The guest needs
to inform the hypervisor which page table entries have been modified, but
actually processing these entries and updating the hardware page tables
can be deferred until page invalidate, cr3 reassignment, or TLB shootdown
time.  All of the details here are hidden behind the VMI "set page table
entry" call.  The guest just uses this call and everything happens on its
behalf.

We give each VCPU a private queue for notifying the hypervisor of page
table updates and other types of CPU state changes that can be deferred.
Because we use per-VCPU page table shadows, we're able to put a private
queue in each VCPU at the same linear address space.  Updates to the queue
thus are just a couple of memory writes, and allows very efficient batching
of page table writes, even for SMP.  The hypervisor and the ROM contain
all the knowledge of this interface (rather than the guest), so it would
be relatively easy to change to support shared shadow page tables, or a
different mechanism for direct-mode page tables.

We're obviously lacking some interfaces needed for direct-mode paging, but
aside from those, are there specific deficiencies for SMP?

(Apologies if quoting/replies aren't set up properly;  I wasn't previously
subscribed to xen-devel, and had this forwarded by a colleague.)

Dan.