linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: move the PTE_VALID to pgtable-hwdef.h
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2016 19:16:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160602181609.GF7697@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1464574468-22700-1-git-send-email-shijie.huang@arm.com>

On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 10:14:26AM +0800, Huang Shijie wrote:
> The PTE_VALID is used to check whether the page descriptor is valid.
> It's not a software defined PTE bits, such as PTE_WRITE/PTE_DIRTY.
> 
> So move it to the proper header file: pgtable-hwdef.h.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Huang Shijie <shijie.huang@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h | 1 +
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-prot.h  | 1 -
>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
> index 2813748..eeb3269 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
> @@ -154,6 +154,7 @@
>  #define PTE_TYPE_MASK		(_AT(pteval_t, 3) << 0)
>  #define PTE_TYPE_FAULT		(_AT(pteval_t, 0) << 0)
>  #define PTE_TYPE_PAGE		(_AT(pteval_t, 3) << 0)
> +#define PTE_VALID		(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 0)
>  #define PTE_TABLE_BIT		(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 1)
>  #define PTE_USER		(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 6)		/* AP[1] */
>  #define PTE_RDONLY		(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 7)		/* AP[2] */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-prot.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-prot.h
> index 29fcb33..5ac71f4 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-prot.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-prot.h
> @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@
>  /*
>   * Software defined PTE bits definition.
>   */
> -#define PTE_VALID		(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 0)
>  #define PTE_WRITE		(PTE_DBM)		 /* same as DBM (51) */

So how would you define PTE_WRITE? It's a software bit in v8.0 and a
hardware bit in v8.1 ;)

I don't mind shuffling the #defines about, I just think the boundaries
are somewhat blurred and maybe it's a mistake to put software bits and
hardware bits in separate headers.

Will

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-06-02 18:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-30  2:14 [PATCH 1/3] arm64: move the PTE_VALID to pgtable-hwdef.h Huang Shijie
2016-05-30  2:14 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: fix the wrong type Huang Shijie
2016-05-30  2:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] arm64: add a new macro for the pgd table descriptor Huang Shijie
2016-06-02 18:16 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-06-03  2:32   ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: move the PTE_VALID to pgtable-hwdef.h Huang Shijie

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=20160602181609.GF7697@arm.com \
    --to=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).