From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf0-f176.google.com (mail-pf0-f176.google.com [209.85.192.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7141E6B0009 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 07:29:59 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pf0-f176.google.com with SMTP id e127so28930930pfe.3 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 04:29:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtprelay.synopsys.com (us01smtprelay-2.synopsys.com. [198.182.60.111]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q88si12364149pfa.197.2016.02.11.04.29.57 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 11 Feb 2016 04:29:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm,thp: refactor generic deposit/withdraw routines for wider usage References: <1455182907-15445-1-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <1455182907-15445-2-git-send-email-vgupta@synopsys.com> <20160211112223.0acc8237@mschwide> <56BC682D.6070808@synopsys.com> <20160211122023.6d719513@mschwide> From: Vineet Gupta Message-ID: <56BC7EAE.7070206@synopsys.com> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 17:59:34 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160211122023.6d719513@mschwide> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Martin Schwidefsky Cc: Andrew Morton , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , "David S. Miller" , Alex Thorlton , Gerald Schaefer , linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Andrea Arcangeli On Thursday 11 February 2016 04:50 PM, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: > On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 16:23:33 +0530 > Vineet Gupta wrote: > >> On Thursday 11 February 2016 03:52 PM, Martin Schwidefsky wrote: >>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:58:26 +0530 >>> Vineet Gupta wrote: >>> >>>> Generic pgtable_trans_huge_deposit()/pgtable_trans_huge_withdraw() >>>> assume pgtable_t to be struct page * which is not true for all arches. >>>> Thus arc, s390, sparch end up with their own copies despite no special >>>> hardware requirements (unlike powerpc). >>> >>> s390 does have a special hardware requirement. pgtable_t is an address >>> for a 2K block of memory. It is *not* equivalent to a struct page * >>> which refers to a 4K block of memory. That has been the whole point >>> to introduce pgtable_t. >> >> Actually my reference to hardware requirement was more like powerpc style save a >> hash value some where etc. >> >> Now pgtable_t need not be struct page * even if the actual sizes are same - e.g. >> in ARC port I kept pgtable_t as pte_t * simply to avoid a few page_address() calls >> in mm code (you could argue that is was a micro-optimization, anyways..) >> >> So given I know nothing about s390 MMU internals, I still think you can switch to >> the update generic version despite 2K vs. 4K. Agree ? > > No, we can not. For s390 a page table is aligned on a 2K boundary and is > only half the size of a page (except for KVM but that is another story). > For s390 a pgtable_t is a pointer to the memory location with the 256 ptes > and not a struct page *. > > The cast "struct page *new = (struct page*)pgtable;" in your first patch > is already broken, "new" points to the memory of the page table and > the list_head operations will clobber that memory. The current s390 code does something similar using a different struct cast. It is still writing in pgtable_t - although at a different location. > You try to fix it up > with the memset to zero in pgtable_trans_huge_withdraw but that does not > correct the pte entries for s390 as an invalid page-table entry is *not* > all zeros. Right so that is the problem - just trying to understand. > In short, please let s390 keep its own copy of deposit/withdraw. You got it - I'm out of the way :-) Thx, -Vineet -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org