From: wujianguo@huawei.com (Jianguo Wu)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: mm: support big-endian page tables
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 16:46:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52FF2967.3050404@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52FB1AAA.9030108@huawei.com>
Ping...
On 2014/2/12 14:54, Jianguo Wu wrote:
> On 2014/2/11 18:40, Ben Dooks wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/14 09:20, Jianguo Wu wrote:
>>> When enable LPAE and big-endian in a hisilicon board, while specify
>>> mem=384M mem=512M at 7680M, will get bad page state:
>>>
>>> Freeing unused kernel memory: 180K (c0466000 - c0493000)
>>> BUG: Bad page state in process init pfn:fa442
>>> page:c7749840 count:0 mapcount:-1 mapping: (null) index:0x0
>>> page flags: 0x40000400(reserved)
>>> Modules linked in:
>>> CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: init Not tainted 3.10.27+ #66
>>> [<c000f5f0>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0x11c) from [<c000cbc4>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
>>> [<c000cbc4>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) from [<c009e448>] (bad_page+0xd4/0x104)
>>> [<c009e448>] (bad_page+0xd4/0x104) from [<c009e520>] (free_pages_prepare+0xa8/0x14c)
>>> [<c009e520>] (free_pages_prepare+0xa8/0x14c) from [<c009f8ec>] (free_hot_cold_page+0x18/0xf0)
>>> [<c009f8ec>] (free_hot_cold_page+0x18/0xf0) from [<c00b5444>] (handle_pte_fault+0xcf4/0xdc8)
>>> [<c00b5444>] (handle_pte_fault+0xcf4/0xdc8) from [<c00b6458>] (handle_mm_fault+0xf4/0x120)
>>> [<c00b6458>] (handle_mm_fault+0xf4/0x120) from [<c0013754>] (do_page_fault+0xfc/0x354)
>>> [<c0013754>] (do_page_fault+0xfc/0x354) from [<c0008400>] (do_DataAbort+0x2c/0x90)
>>> [<c0008400>] (do_DataAbort+0x2c/0x90) from [<c0008fb4>] (__dabt_usr+0x34/0x40)
>>>
>>> The bad pfn:fa442 is not system memory(mem=384M mem=512M at 7680M), after debugging,
>>> I find in page fault handler, will get wrong pfn from pte just after set pte,
>>> as follow:
>>> do_anonymous_page()
>>> {
>>> ...
>>> set_pte_at(mm, address, page_table, entry);
>>>
>>> //debug code
>>> pfn = pte_pfn(entry);
>>> pr_info("pfn:0x%lx, pte:0x%llx\n", pfn, pte_val(entry));
>>>
>>> //read out the pte just set
>>> new_pte = pte_offset_map(pmd, address);
>>> new_pfn = pte_pfn(*new_pte);
>>> pr_info("new pfn:0x%lx, new pte:0x%llx\n", pfn, pte_val(entry));
>>> ...
>>> }
>>
>> Thanks, must have missed tickling this one.
>>
>>>
>>> pfn: 0x1fa4f5, pte:0xc00001fa4f575f
>>> new_pfn:0xfa4f5, new_pte:0xc00000fa4f5f5f //new pfn/pte is wrong.
>>>
>>> The bug is happened in cpu_v7_set_pte_ext(ptep, pte):
>>> when pte is 64-bit, for little-endian, will store low 32-bit in r2,
>>> high 32-bit in r3; for big-endian, will store low 32-bit in r3,
>>> high 32-bit in r2, this will cause wrong pfn stored in pte,
>>> so we should exchange r2 and r3 for big-endian.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 10 ++++++++++
>>> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> index 6ba4bd9..71b3892 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> @@ -65,6 +65,15 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
>>> */
>>> ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ENDIAN_BE8
>>> + tst r3, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> + beq 1f
>>> + tst r2, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
>>> + bicne r3, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> + bne 1f
>>> + tst r2, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
>>> + orreq r3, #L_PTE_RDONLY
>>> +#else
>>> tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> beq 1f
>>> tst r3, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
>>> @@ -72,6 +81,7 @@ ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
>>> bne 1f
>>> tst r3, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
>>> orreq r2, #L_PTE_RDONLY
>>> +#endif
>>> 1: strd r2, r3, [r0]
>>> ALT_SMP(W(nop))
>>> ALT_UP (mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1) @ flush_pte
>>> -- 1.7.1
>>
>> If possible can we avoid large #ifdef blocks here?
>>
>> Two ideas are
>>
>> ARM_LE(tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID)
>> ARM_BE(tst r3, #L_PTE_VALID)
>>
>> or change r2, r3 pair to say rlow, rhi and
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ENDIAN_BE8
>> #define rlow r3
>> #define rhi r2
>> #else
>> #define rlow r2
>> #define rhi r3
>> #endif
>>
>
> Hi Ben,
> Thanks for your suggestion, how about this?
>
> Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> index 01a719e..22e3ad6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> @@ -64,6 +64,14 @@ ENTRY(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
> mov pc, lr
> ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
>
> +#ifdef __ARMEB__
> +#define rl r3
> +#define rh r2
> +#else
> +#define rl r2
> +#define rh r3
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * cpu_v7_set_pte_ext(ptep, pte)
> *
> @@ -73,13 +81,13 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
> */
> ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> - tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID
> + tst rl, #L_PTE_VALID
> beq 1f
> - tst r3, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
> - bicne r2, #L_PTE_VALID
> + tst rh, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
> + bicne rl, #L_PTE_VALID
> bne 1f
> - tst r3, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
> - orreq r2, #L_PTE_RDONLY
> + tst rh, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
> + orreq rl, #L_PTE_RDONLY
> 1: strd r2, r3, [r0]
> ALT_SMP(W(nop))
> ALT_UP (mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1) @ flush_pte
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
To: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Cc: linux@arm.linux.org.uk, will.deacon@arm.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>, Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mm: support big-endian page tables
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 16:46:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52FF2967.3050404@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52FB1AAA.9030108@huawei.com>
Ping...
On 2014/2/12 14:54, Jianguo Wu wrote:
> On 2014/2/11 18:40, Ben Dooks wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/14 09:20, Jianguo Wu wrote:
>>> When enable LPAE and big-endian in a hisilicon board, while specify
>>> mem=384M mem=512M@7680M, will get bad page state:
>>>
>>> Freeing unused kernel memory: 180K (c0466000 - c0493000)
>>> BUG: Bad page state in process init pfn:fa442
>>> page:c7749840 count:0 mapcount:-1 mapping: (null) index:0x0
>>> page flags: 0x40000400(reserved)
>>> Modules linked in:
>>> CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: init Not tainted 3.10.27+ #66
>>> [<c000f5f0>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0x11c) from [<c000cbc4>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
>>> [<c000cbc4>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) from [<c009e448>] (bad_page+0xd4/0x104)
>>> [<c009e448>] (bad_page+0xd4/0x104) from [<c009e520>] (free_pages_prepare+0xa8/0x14c)
>>> [<c009e520>] (free_pages_prepare+0xa8/0x14c) from [<c009f8ec>] (free_hot_cold_page+0x18/0xf0)
>>> [<c009f8ec>] (free_hot_cold_page+0x18/0xf0) from [<c00b5444>] (handle_pte_fault+0xcf4/0xdc8)
>>> [<c00b5444>] (handle_pte_fault+0xcf4/0xdc8) from [<c00b6458>] (handle_mm_fault+0xf4/0x120)
>>> [<c00b6458>] (handle_mm_fault+0xf4/0x120) from [<c0013754>] (do_page_fault+0xfc/0x354)
>>> [<c0013754>] (do_page_fault+0xfc/0x354) from [<c0008400>] (do_DataAbort+0x2c/0x90)
>>> [<c0008400>] (do_DataAbort+0x2c/0x90) from [<c0008fb4>] (__dabt_usr+0x34/0x40)
>>>
>>> The bad pfn:fa442 is not system memory(mem=384M mem=512M@7680M), after debugging,
>>> I find in page fault handler, will get wrong pfn from pte just after set pte,
>>> as follow:
>>> do_anonymous_page()
>>> {
>>> ...
>>> set_pte_at(mm, address, page_table, entry);
>>>
>>> //debug code
>>> pfn = pte_pfn(entry);
>>> pr_info("pfn:0x%lx, pte:0x%llx\n", pfn, pte_val(entry));
>>>
>>> //read out the pte just set
>>> new_pte = pte_offset_map(pmd, address);
>>> new_pfn = pte_pfn(*new_pte);
>>> pr_info("new pfn:0x%lx, new pte:0x%llx\n", pfn, pte_val(entry));
>>> ...
>>> }
>>
>> Thanks, must have missed tickling this one.
>>
>>>
>>> pfn: 0x1fa4f5, pte:0xc00001fa4f575f
>>> new_pfn:0xfa4f5, new_pte:0xc00000fa4f5f5f //new pfn/pte is wrong.
>>>
>>> The bug is happened in cpu_v7_set_pte_ext(ptep, pte):
>>> when pte is 64-bit, for little-endian, will store low 32-bit in r2,
>>> high 32-bit in r3; for big-endian, will store low 32-bit in r3,
>>> high 32-bit in r2, this will cause wrong pfn stored in pte,
>>> so we should exchange r2 and r3 for big-endian.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 10 ++++++++++
>>> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> index 6ba4bd9..71b3892 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> @@ -65,6 +65,15 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
>>> */
>>> ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ENDIAN_BE8
>>> + tst r3, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> + beq 1f
>>> + tst r2, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
>>> + bicne r3, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> + bne 1f
>>> + tst r2, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
>>> + orreq r3, #L_PTE_RDONLY
>>> +#else
>>> tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> beq 1f
>>> tst r3, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
>>> @@ -72,6 +81,7 @@ ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
>>> bne 1f
>>> tst r3, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
>>> orreq r2, #L_PTE_RDONLY
>>> +#endif
>>> 1: strd r2, r3, [r0]
>>> ALT_SMP(W(nop))
>>> ALT_UP (mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1) @ flush_pte
>>> -- 1.7.1
>>
>> If possible can we avoid large #ifdef blocks here?
>>
>> Two ideas are
>>
>> ARM_LE(tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID)
>> ARM_BE(tst r3, #L_PTE_VALID)
>>
>> or change r2, r3 pair to say rlow, rhi and
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ENDIAN_BE8
>> #define rlow r3
>> #define rhi r2
>> #else
>> #define rlow r2
>> #define rhi r3
>> #endif
>>
>
> Hi Ben,
> Thanks for your suggestion, how about this?
>
> Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> index 01a719e..22e3ad6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> @@ -64,6 +64,14 @@ ENTRY(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
> mov pc, lr
> ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
>
> +#ifdef __ARMEB__
> +#define rl r3
> +#define rh r2
> +#else
> +#define rl r2
> +#define rh r3
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * cpu_v7_set_pte_ext(ptep, pte)
> *
> @@ -73,13 +81,13 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
> */
> ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> - tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID
> + tst rl, #L_PTE_VALID
> beq 1f
> - tst r3, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
> - bicne r2, #L_PTE_VALID
> + tst rh, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
> + bicne rl, #L_PTE_VALID
> bne 1f
> - tst r3, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
> - orreq r2, #L_PTE_RDONLY
> + tst rh, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
> + orreq rl, #L_PTE_RDONLY
> 1: strd r2, r3, [r0]
> ALT_SMP(W(nop))
> ALT_UP (mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1) @ flush_pte
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
To: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Cc: <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, <will.deacon@arm.com>,
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Li Zefan" <lizefan@huawei.com>, Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: mm: support big-endian page tables
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 16:46:31 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52FF2967.3050404@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52FB1AAA.9030108@huawei.com>
Ping...
On 2014/2/12 14:54, Jianguo Wu wrote:
> On 2014/2/11 18:40, Ben Dooks wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/14 09:20, Jianguo Wu wrote:
>>> When enable LPAE and big-endian in a hisilicon board, while specify
>>> mem=384M mem=512M@7680M, will get bad page state:
>>>
>>> Freeing unused kernel memory: 180K (c0466000 - c0493000)
>>> BUG: Bad page state in process init pfn:fa442
>>> page:c7749840 count:0 mapcount:-1 mapping: (null) index:0x0
>>> page flags: 0x40000400(reserved)
>>> Modules linked in:
>>> CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: init Not tainted 3.10.27+ #66
>>> [<c000f5f0>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0x11c) from [<c000cbc4>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
>>> [<c000cbc4>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14) from [<c009e448>] (bad_page+0xd4/0x104)
>>> [<c009e448>] (bad_page+0xd4/0x104) from [<c009e520>] (free_pages_prepare+0xa8/0x14c)
>>> [<c009e520>] (free_pages_prepare+0xa8/0x14c) from [<c009f8ec>] (free_hot_cold_page+0x18/0xf0)
>>> [<c009f8ec>] (free_hot_cold_page+0x18/0xf0) from [<c00b5444>] (handle_pte_fault+0xcf4/0xdc8)
>>> [<c00b5444>] (handle_pte_fault+0xcf4/0xdc8) from [<c00b6458>] (handle_mm_fault+0xf4/0x120)
>>> [<c00b6458>] (handle_mm_fault+0xf4/0x120) from [<c0013754>] (do_page_fault+0xfc/0x354)
>>> [<c0013754>] (do_page_fault+0xfc/0x354) from [<c0008400>] (do_DataAbort+0x2c/0x90)
>>> [<c0008400>] (do_DataAbort+0x2c/0x90) from [<c0008fb4>] (__dabt_usr+0x34/0x40)
>>>
>>> The bad pfn:fa442 is not system memory(mem=384M mem=512M@7680M), after debugging,
>>> I find in page fault handler, will get wrong pfn from pte just after set pte,
>>> as follow:
>>> do_anonymous_page()
>>> {
>>> ...
>>> set_pte_at(mm, address, page_table, entry);
>>>
>>> //debug code
>>> pfn = pte_pfn(entry);
>>> pr_info("pfn:0x%lx, pte:0x%llx\n", pfn, pte_val(entry));
>>>
>>> //read out the pte just set
>>> new_pte = pte_offset_map(pmd, address);
>>> new_pfn = pte_pfn(*new_pte);
>>> pr_info("new pfn:0x%lx, new pte:0x%llx\n", pfn, pte_val(entry));
>>> ...
>>> }
>>
>> Thanks, must have missed tickling this one.
>>
>>>
>>> pfn: 0x1fa4f5, pte:0xc00001fa4f575f
>>> new_pfn:0xfa4f5, new_pte:0xc00000fa4f5f5f //new pfn/pte is wrong.
>>>
>>> The bug is happened in cpu_v7_set_pte_ext(ptep, pte):
>>> when pte is 64-bit, for little-endian, will store low 32-bit in r2,
>>> high 32-bit in r3; for big-endian, will store low 32-bit in r3,
>>> high 32-bit in r2, this will cause wrong pfn stored in pte,
>>> so we should exchange r2 and r3 for big-endian.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 10 ++++++++++
>>> 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> index 6ba4bd9..71b3892 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
>>> @@ -65,6 +65,15 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
>>> */
>>> ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ENDIAN_BE8
>>> + tst r3, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> + beq 1f
>>> + tst r2, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
>>> + bicne r3, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> + bne 1f
>>> + tst r2, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
>>> + orreq r3, #L_PTE_RDONLY
>>> +#else
>>> tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID
>>> beq 1f
>>> tst r3, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
>>> @@ -72,6 +81,7 @@ ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
>>> bne 1f
>>> tst r3, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
>>> orreq r2, #L_PTE_RDONLY
>>> +#endif
>>> 1: strd r2, r3, [r0]
>>> ALT_SMP(W(nop))
>>> ALT_UP (mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1) @ flush_pte
>>> -- 1.7.1
>>
>> If possible can we avoid large #ifdef blocks here?
>>
>> Two ideas are
>>
>> ARM_LE(tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID)
>> ARM_BE(tst r3, #L_PTE_VALID)
>>
>> or change r2, r3 pair to say rlow, rhi and
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_ENDIAN_BE8
>> #define rlow r3
>> #define rhi r2
>> #else
>> #define rlow r2
>> #define rhi r3
>> #endif
>>
>
> Hi Ben,
> Thanks for your suggestion, how about this?
>
> Signed-off-by: Jianguo Wu <wujianguo@huawei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S | 18 +++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> index 01a719e..22e3ad6 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S
> @@ -64,6 +64,14 @@ ENTRY(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
> mov pc, lr
> ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
>
> +#ifdef __ARMEB__
> +#define rl r3
> +#define rh r2
> +#else
> +#define rl r2
> +#define rh r3
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * cpu_v7_set_pte_ext(ptep, pte)
> *
> @@ -73,13 +81,13 @@ ENDPROC(cpu_v7_switch_mm)
> */
> ENTRY(cpu_v7_set_pte_ext)
> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> - tst r2, #L_PTE_VALID
> + tst rl, #L_PTE_VALID
> beq 1f
> - tst r3, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
> - bicne r2, #L_PTE_VALID
> + tst rh, #1 << (57 - 32) @ L_PTE_NONE
> + bicne rl, #L_PTE_VALID
> bne 1f
> - tst r3, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
> - orreq r2, #L_PTE_RDONLY
> + tst rh, #1 << (55 - 32) @ L_PTE_DIRTY
> + orreq rl, #L_PTE_RDONLY
> 1: strd r2, r3, [r0]
> ALT_SMP(W(nop))
> ALT_UP (mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1) @ flush_pte
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-15 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-11 9:20 [PATCH] ARM: mm: support big-endian page tables Jianguo Wu
2014-02-11 9:20 ` Jianguo Wu
2014-02-11 9:20 ` Jianguo Wu
2014-02-11 10:40 ` Ben Dooks
2014-02-11 10:40 ` Ben Dooks
2014-02-11 10:40 ` Ben Dooks
2014-02-12 6:54 ` Jianguo Wu
2014-02-12 6:54 ` Jianguo Wu
2014-02-12 6:54 ` Jianguo Wu
2014-02-15 8:46 ` Jianguo Wu [this message]
2014-02-15 8:46 ` Jianguo Wu
2014-02-15 8:46 ` Jianguo Wu
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=52FF2967.3050404@huawei.com \
--to=wujianguo@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.