From: Andrew Donnellan <andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com>
To: Ian Munsie <imunsie@au1.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl: fix setting of _PAGE_USER bit when handling page faults
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 15:38:39 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56EF7ACF.5020506@au1.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1458282296-sup-2460@x230.ozlabs.ibm.com>
On 18/03/16 17:30, Ian Munsie wrote:
> Excerpts from andrew.donnellan's message of 2016-03-18 15:01:21 +1100:
>> Fixes: f204e0b8cedd ("cxl: Driver code for powernv PCIe based cards for
>> userspace access")
>
> It doesn't fix that since there was no cxl kernel API support at the
> time, so this wasn't a regression - just something we missed when the
> kernel api was added (I believe the broken test in the code was a left
> over from some early bringup work and would never have been exercised on
> an upstream kernel until then).
Ah, fair enough - I just looked at what git blame told me. You're right,
it's not a fix to that commit per se. Happy to drop this tag.
> We haven't run into any problems because of this that I am aware of - do
> we have a test case for this?
I'd be surprised if it caused noticeable problems - the presence of the
_PAGE_USER bit when it's not necessary shouldn't break anything, as
opposed to the absence of _PAGE_USER when it is necessary. Not entirely
sure what the test case would be.
>
>> - if ((!ctx->kernel) || ~(dar & (1ULL << 63)))
>> + if ((!ctx->kernel) || !(dar & (1ULL << 63)))
>
> Should it be the top two bits?
benh told me that the top bit should be enough - anything above 0x8000*
should be kernel space.
--
Andrew Donnellan Software Engineer, OzLabs
andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com Australia Development Lab, Canberra
+61 2 6201 8874 (work) IBM Australia Limited
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-21 4:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-18 4:01 [PATCH] cxl: fix setting of _PAGE_USER bit when handling page faults Andrew Donnellan
2016-03-18 6:30 ` Ian Munsie
2016-03-21 4:38 ` Andrew Donnellan [this message]
2016-03-25 10:01 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-03-25 17:15 ` Ian Munsie
2016-03-28 13:42 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-03-28 18:00 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-04-11 4:10 ` Andrew Donnellan
2016-04-11 4:27 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-04-11 4:31 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-04-11 11:14 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-04-11 13:42 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2016-04-12 11:42 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-03-29 22:08 ` [PATCH] " Matthew R. Ochs
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=56EF7ACF.5020506@au1.ibm.com \
--to=andrew.donnellan@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=imunsie@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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.