All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	macro@linux-mips.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com,
	eike-kernel@sf-tec.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: ioremap: fix wrong physical address handling
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:55:22 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C19AABA.8000706@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C19A2EE.2010203@zytor.com>

(2010/06/17 13:22), H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/16/2010 07:50 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:30:06AM +0900, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
>>> Index: linux-2.6.34/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- linux-2.6.34.orig/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c 2010-06-15 
>>> 04:43:00.978332015 +0900
>>> +++ linux-2.6.34/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c 2010-06-15 05:32:59.291693007 
>>> +0900
>>> @@ -62,8 +62,8 @@
>>> static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr,
>>> unsigned long size, unsigned long prot_val, void *caller)
>>> {
>>> - unsigned long pfn, offset, vaddr;
>>> - resource_size_t last_addr;
>>> + unsigned long offset, vaddr;
>>> + resource_size_t pfn, last_pfn, last_addr;
>>
>> I have a hard time understanding this change. pfn is always a physical
>> address shifted by PAGE_SHIFT. So a 32-bit pfn supports up to 44-bit
>> physical addresses. Are your addresses above 44-bits?
>>
> 
> I think they might be. Kenji?

No. My addresses are in the 44-bits range (around fc000000000). So it is
not required for my problem. This change assumes that phys_addr can be
above 44-bits (up to 52-bits (and higher in the future?)).

By the way, is there linux kernel limit regarding above 44-bits physical
address in x86_32 PAE? For example, pfn above 32-bits is not supported?

#ifdef CONFIG_X86_PAE
/* 44=32+12, the limit we can fit into an unsigned long pfn */
#define __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT   44
#define __VIRTUAL_MASK_SHIFT    32

If there is 44-bits physical address limit, I think it's better to use
PHYSICAL_PAGE_MASK for masking physical address, instead of "(phys_addr
>> PAGE_SHIFT) << PAGE_SHIFT)". The PHYSICAL_PAGE_MASK would become
greater value when 44-bits physical address limit is eliminated. And
maybe we need to change phys_addr_valid() returns error if physical
address is above (1 << __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT)?

Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige


  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-17  4:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-17  1:28 [BUG][PATCH 0/2 (v.2)] x86: ioremap() problem in X86_32 PAE Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  1:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: ioremap: fix wrong physical address handling Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  2:50   ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-06-17  4:22     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-17  4:55       ` Kenji Kaneshige [this message]
2010-06-17  6:03         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-17  6:21           ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  9:35           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-06-17  9:38             ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-06-17 13:46             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-18  0:32               ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-18  0:22             ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09  4:24             ` Simon Horman
2010-07-09  5:33               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-07-09  6:10                 ` Simon Horman
2010-06-17  6:28     ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09 18:31   ` [tip:x86/mm] x86, pae: Fix handling of large physical addresses in ioremap tip-bot for Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09 18:43     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-17  1:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: ioremap: fix normal ram range check Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09 18:31   ` [tip:x86/mm] x86, ioremap: Fix " tip-bot for Kenji Kaneshige
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-06-18  3:21 [BUG][PATCH 0/2 (v.3)] x86: ioremap() problem in X86_32 PAE Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-18  3:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: ioremap: fix wrong physical address handling Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-18 11:07   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-06-21  1:40     ` Kenji Kaneshige

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4C19AABA.8000706@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=eike-kernel@sf-tec.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.