From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ram Pai Subject: Re: [RFC v5 36/38] selftest: PowerPC specific test updates to memory protection keys Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 14:57:29 -0700 Message-ID: <20170712215729.GC5525@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> References: <1499289735-14220-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <1499289735-14220-37-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: Ram Pai Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:51916 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752021AbdGLV5q (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:57:46 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098417.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.21/8.16.0.21) with SMTP id v6CLrXJB045855 for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:57:45 -0400 Received: from e17.ny.us.ibm.com (e17.ny.us.ibm.com [129.33.205.207]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2bnt3nm6dv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:57:45 -0400 Received: from localhost by e17.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 12 Jul 2017 17:57:44 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Dave Hansen Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com, arnd@arndb.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net, mingo@redhat.com On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 10:33:09AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 07/05/2017 02:22 PM, Ram Pai wrote: > > Abstracted out the arch specific code into the header file, and > > added powerpc specific changes. > > > > a) added 4k-backed hpte, memory allocator, powerpc specific. > > b) added three test case where the key is associated after the page is > > accessed/allocated/mapped. > > c) cleaned up the code to make checkpatch.pl happy > > There's a *lot* of churn here. If it breaks, I'm going to have a heck > of a time figuring out which hunk broke. Is there any way to break this > up into a series of things that we have a chance at bisecting? Just finished breaking down the changes into 20 gradual increments. I have pushed it to my github tree at https://github.com/rampai/memorykeys.git branch is memkey.v6-rc3 See if it works for you. I am sure I would have broken something on x86 since I dont have a x86 platform to test. Let me know, Thanks, RP