From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [103.22.144.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3rldBg6jxszDqvp for ; Thu, 7 Jul 2016 23:04:59 +1000 (AEST) Message-ID: <1467896692.27157.42.camel@kernel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/41] drm: Fix broken use of _PAGE_NO_CACHE on powerpc From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Michael Ellerman , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 23:04:52 +1000 In-Reply-To: <87inwhoc7a.fsf@@concordia.ellerman.id.au> References: <1467695057-12431-1-git-send-email-benh@kernel.crashing.org> <1467695057-12431-3-git-send-email-benh@kernel.crashing.org> <87inwhoc7a.fsf@@concordia.ellerman.id.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 22:38 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Benjamin Herrenschmidt writes: > > > That constant no longer exist. Use the proper accessor instead > > I still see it? Hrm, right, it does, I think it's just not always accessible or the wrong type. That stuff wasn't building anymore. In any case, it shouldn't be used outside of the arch, the accessors are better. >   arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/32/hash.h:#define _PAGE_NO_CACHE 0x020 /* I: cache inhibit */ >   arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h:#define _PAGE_NO_CACHE _PAGE_TOLERANT >   arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/32/pte-44x.h:#define _PAGE_NO_CACHE 0x00000400 /* H: I bit */ >   arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/32/pte-8xx.h:#define _PAGE_NO_CACHE 0x0002 /* I: cache inhibit */ >   arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/32/pte-fsl-booke.h:#define _PAGE_NO_CACHE 0x00200 /* H: I bit */ >   arch/powerpc/include/asm/nohash/pte-book3e.h:#define _PAGE_NO_CACHE 0x400000 /* I: cache inhibit */ > > Do you mean it doesn't exist in some cases? Or pgprot_noncached_wc() is > just better? > > Also this should probably at least get Cc'ed to the DRM folks. Ah yes :-) Cheers, Ben.