[GIT PULL] arm64 fixes for 3.11

[GIT PULL] arm64 fixes for 3.11

[Catalin Marinas]

Hi Linus,

Please pull the arm64 fixes below. Thanks.


The following changes since commit 3b2f64d00c46e1e4e9bd0bb9bb12619adac27a4b:

  Linux 3.11-rc2 (2013-07-21 12:05:29 -0700)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cmarinas/linux-aarch64.git tags/arm64-stable

for you to fetch changes up to 845ad05ec31e0f3872a321e10dbeaf872022632c:

  arm64: Change kernel stack size to 16K (2013-07-26 13:37:29 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
- Stack size increased to 16K (similar to other 64-bit architectures)
- Additional cache flushing for secondary CPUs boot mode

----------------------------------------------------------------
Catalin Marinas (1):
      arm64: Fix definition of arm_pm_restart to match the declaration

Feng Kan (1):
      arm64: Change kernel stack size to 16K

Mark Rutland (1):
      arm64: virt: ensure visibility of __boot_cpu_mode

 arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h |  4 ++--
 arch/arm64/include/asm/virt.h        | 13 +++++++++++++
 arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S            |  2 +-
 arch/arm64/kernel/process.c          |  2 +-
 4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

-- 
Catalin

[GIT PULL] arm64 fixes for 3.11

[Linus Torvalds]

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>
> - Stack size increased to 16K (similar to other 64-bit architectures)

I pulled, but this is misleading.

*Some* other 64-bit architectures do 16k stack sizes. But neither
x86-64 nor powerpc do, afaik. Instead, they do irq stacks, which is
generally a better idea than having one big stack.

                Linus

[GIT PULL] arm64 fixes for 3.11

[Benjamin Herrenschmidt]

On Fri, 2013-07-26 at 12:54 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> *Some* other 64-bit architectures do 16k stack sizes. But neither
> x86-64 nor powerpc do, afaik. Instead, they do irq stacks, which is
> generally a better idea than having one big stack.

Sadly you over estimated us here :-) We do 16K *and* irq stacks on
64-bit ... Remember our ABI with it's 112 bytes minimum per frame ?

It's been a while since I've last audited our actual usage mind you, we
*might* be able to reduce it but at this stage, since our typical
configs use a 64K base page size, it's not a big deal (ie, it's not an
order-N allocation).

Cheers,
Ben.