[PATCH v4 4/7] arm64: Add a description on 48-bit address space with 4KB pages

[jays.lee@samsung.com (Jungseok Lee)]

On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 10:12 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 07:41:40AM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:48 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 05:59:27AM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> > > > --- a/Documentation/arm64/memory.txt
> > > > +++ b/Documentation/arm64/memory.txt
> > > > @@ -8,10 +8,11 @@ This document describes the virtual memory
> > > > layout used by the AArch64  Linux kernel. The architecture allows
> > > > up to 4 levels of translation  tables with a 4KB page size and up to 3 levels with a 64KB page
> size.
> > > >
> > > > -AArch64 Linux uses 3 levels of translation tables with the 4KB
> > > > page -configuration, allowing 39-bit (512GB) virtual addresses for
> > > > both user -and kernel. With 64KB pages, only 2 levels of
> > > > translation tables are -used but the memory layout is the same.
> > > > +AArch64 Linux uses 3 levels and 4 levels of translation tables
> > > > +with the 4KB page configuration, allowing 39-bit (512GB) and
> > > > +48-bit
> > > > +(256TB) virtual addresses, respectively, for both user and kernel.
> > > > +With 64KB pages, only 2 levels of translation tables are used but
> > > > +the memory layout is the same.
> > >
> > > Any reason why we couldn't use 48-bit address space with 64K pages (implying 3 levels)?
> >
> > No technical reason.
> > Since 64K+3levels is not implemented in this set, I didn't add it.
> >
> > Should 64K+3levels be prepared in this patchset?
> >
> > > > -AArch64 Linux memory layout with 64KB pages:
> > > > +AArch64 Linux memory layout with 4KB pages + 4 levels:
> > > > +
> > > > +Start			End			Size		Use
> > > > +-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > +0000000000000000	0000ffffffffffff	 256TB		user
> > > > +
> > > > +ffff000000000000	ffff7bfffffeffff	~124TB		vmalloc
> > >
> > > BTW, maybe as a separate patch we should change the "end" to be
> > > exclusive. It becomes harder to modify (I've been through this a few times already ;)) and even
> follow the changes.
> >
> > Does "exclusive" mean that 0000ffffffffffff is changed to 0001000000000000?
> > Or Does it mean that "End" column is dropped?
> 
> Not dropped but changed to 0001.... (the kernel already prints the memory layout in a similar way).

I see. I will make it as a separate patch.

Best Regards
Jungseok Lee