From: Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@freescale.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Matt Porter <mporter@kernel.crashing.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
linux-ppc-embedded list <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: pte_update and 64-bit PTEs on PPC32?
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 01:51:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <93f533baba2b2f73ac9ec46b5401747e@freescale.com> (raw)
Paul,
I've tracked down a bug I've been having to the fact that pte_update
assumes a pte is a unsigned long. I need to look into what the exact
implications this has. I was wondering what the thoughts were with
respect to how this is suppose to work properly on 440 with its 64-bit
pte? I'm looking at a 64-bit pte for some Freescale book-e parts as we
move to 36-bit physical address support.
The problem I found was ptep_get_and_clear() would return back only a
32-bit value and thus we loose any information in the upper 32-bits. I
found the call in sys_mprotect ... -> change_pte_range ->
ptep_get_and_clear()
Will provide some update on this tomorrow.
- kumar
next reply other threads:[~2005-04-06 6:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-06 6:51 Kumar Gala [this message]
2005-04-06 6:53 ` pte_update and 64-bit PTEs on PPC32? Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-04-06 16:44 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-06 17:20 ` Chris Friesen
2005-04-06 17:58 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-06 21:33 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-08 8:26 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 14:08 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-08 18:44 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 19:01 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-08 21:04 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 21:31 ` Dan Malek
2005-04-08 21:44 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 23:32 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-09 0:32 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-04-06 22:22 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-04-06 22:27 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-07 11:15 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=93f533baba2b2f73ac9ec46b5401747e@freescale.com \
--to=kumar.gala@freescale.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mporter@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.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.