From: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
To: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
dave.hansen@intel.com, paulus@samba.org,
aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 02/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 64K backed hpte pages.
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:25:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170620232507.GG17588@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ff6fe458-6539-e237-4556-41872385815a@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 04:21:45PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 06/17/2017 09:22 AM, Ram Pai wrote:
> > Rearrange 64K PTE bits to free up bits 3, 4, 5 and 6
> > in the 64K backed hpte pages. This along with the earlier
> > patch will entirely free up the four bits from 64K PTE.
> >
> > This patch does the following change to 64K PTE that is
> > backed by 64K hpte.
> >
> > H_PAGE_F_SECOND which occupied bit 4 moves to the second part
> > of the pte.
> > H_PAGE_F_GIX which occupied bit 5, 6 and 7 also moves to the
> > second part of the pte.
> >
> > since bit 7 is now freed up, we move H_PAGE_BUSY from bit 9
> > to bit 7. Trying to minimize gaps so that contiguous bits
> > can be allocated if needed in the future.
> >
> > The second part of the PTE will hold
> > (H_PAGE_F_SECOND|H_PAGE_F_GIX) at bit 60,61,62,63.
>
> I still dont understand how we freed up the 5th bit which is
> used in the 5th patch. Was that bit never used for any thing
> on 64K page size (64K and 4K mappings) ?
yes. it was not used. So I gladly used it :-)
RP
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-20 23:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-17 3:52 [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 01/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 4K backed hpte pages Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:20 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:23 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21 5:35 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21 6:34 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21 6:41 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 9:30 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-22 9:07 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-22 16:20 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 02/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 64K " Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:51 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:25 ` Ram Pai [this message]
2017-06-21 6:50 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 6:54 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 20:14 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 03/12] powerpc: Implement sys_pkey_alloc and sys_pkey_free system call Ram Pai
2017-06-19 12:18 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20 22:45 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 04/12] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 05/12] powerpc: Implementation for sys_mprotect_pkey() system call Ram Pai
2017-06-21 7:16 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 06/12] powerpc: Program HPTE key protection bits Ram Pai
2017-06-20 8:21 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:26 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 07/12] powerpc: Macro the mask used for checking DSI exception Ram Pai
2017-06-20 8:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:28 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21 7:25 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 9:17 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 08/12] powerpc: Handle exceptions caused by violation of pkey protection Ram Pai
2017-06-20 7:24 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:43 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21 3:54 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21 6:26 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 09/12] powerpc: Deliver SEGV signal on pkey violation Ram Pai
2017-06-20 6:54 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:56 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21 3:18 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21 6:10 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 10/12] powerpc: Read AMR only if pkey-violation caused the exception Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:06 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-19 17:59 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20 6:46 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:58 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20 23:56 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 11/12]Documentation: Documentation updates Ram Pai
2017-06-20 6:18 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21 0:04 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17 3:52 ` [RFC v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:04 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20 6:26 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21 0:10 ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20 5:10 ` [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Balbir Singh
2017-06-20 6:05 ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 9:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=20170620232507.GG17588@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com \
--to=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.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).