From: "prodyut hazarika" <prodyuth@gmail.com>
To: "Ilya Yanok" <yanok@emcraft.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, wd@denx.de, dzu@denx.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: add support for PAGE_SIZEs greater than 4KB for
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 09:57:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49c0ff980809110957h4b7b85d4ie39dbb27d1edbe39@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1221083587-8091-2-git-send-email-yanok@emcraft.com>
I was planning to post a similar patch. Good that you already posted
it :-) I will try to finish off similar patch for 40x processors.
>
> +choice
> + prompt "Page size"
> + depends on 44x && PPC32
> + default PPC32_4K_PAGES
> + help
> + The PAGE_SIZE definition. Increasing the page size may
> + improve the system performance in some dedicated cases.
> + If unsure, set it to 4 KB.
> +
You should mention an example of dedicated cases (eg. RAID).
I think this help should mention that for page size 256KB, you will
need to have a special version of binutils, since the ELF standard
mentions page sizes only upto 64KB.
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES
> +#if defined(CONFIG_PPC32_256K_PAGES)
> +#define PAGE_SHIFT 18
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_PPC32_64K_PAGES) || defined(CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES)
> #define PAGE_SHIFT 16
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_PPC32_16K_PAGES)
> +#define PAGE_SHIFT 14
> #else
> #define PAGE_SHIFT 12
> #endif
Why should the new defines be inside CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES? The
definition CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES is repeated.
Shouldn't these defines be like this:
#if defined(CONFIG_PPC32_256K_PAGES)
#define PAGE_SHIFT 18
#elif defined(CONFIG_PPC32_64K_PAGES) || defined(CONFIG_PPC_64K_PAGES)
#define PAGE_SHIFT 16
#elif defined(CONFIG_PPC32_16K_PAGES)
#define PAGE_SHIFT 14
#else
#define PAGE_SHIFT 12
#endif
> +#elif (PAGE_SHIFT == 14)
> +/*
> + * PAGE_SIZE 16K
> + * PAGE_SHIFT 14
> + * PTE_SHIFT 11
> + * PMD_SHIFT 25
> + */
> +#define PPC44x_TLBE_SIZE PPC44x_TLB_16K
> +#define PPC44x_PGD_OFF_SH 9 /*(32 - PMD_SHIFT + 2)*/
> +#define PPC44x_PGD_OFF_M1 23 /*(PMD_SHIFT - 2)*/
> +#define PPC44x_PTE_ADD_SH 21 /*32 - PMD_SHIFT + PTE_SHIFT + 3*/
> +#define PPC44x_PTE_ADD_M1 18 /*32 - 3 - PTE_SHIFT*/
> +#define PPC44x_RPN_M2 17 /*31 - PAGE_SHIFT*/
Please change PPC44x_PGD_OFF_SH to PPC44x_PGD_OFF_SHIFT. SH sounds
very confusing. I don't like the MI and M2 names too. Change
PPC44x_RPN_M2 to PPC44x_RPN_MASK. Change M1 to MASK in
PPC44x_PGD_OFF_M1 and PPC44x_PTE_ADD_M1 .
Is there no way a define like
#define PPC44x_PGD_OFF_SH (32 - PMD_SHIFT + 2)
be used in assembly file. If yes, we can avoid repeating the defines.
I think these 44x specific defines should go to asm/mmu-44x.h since I
am planning to post a patch for 40x. For those processors, the defines
below will changes as:
#define PPC44x_PTE_ADD_SH (32 - PMD_SHIFT + PTE_SHIFT + 2)
#define PPC44x_PTE_ADD_M1 (32 - 2 - PTE_SHIFT)
Since these defines are not generic, they should be put in the mmu
specific header file rather than adding a new header file. When 40x
processors are supported, the corresponding defines can go to
include/asm/mmu-40x.h
> +#elif (PAGE_SHIFT == 18)
> +/*
> + * PAGE_SIZE 256K
> + * PAGE_SHIFT 18
> + * PTE_SHIFT 11
> + * PMD_SHIFT 29
> + */
> +#define PPC44x_TLBE_SIZE PPC44x_TLB_256K
> +#define PPC44x_PGD_OFF_SH 5 /*(32 - PMD_SHIFT + 2)*/
> +#define PPC44x_PGD_OFF_M1 27 /*(PMD_SHIFT - 2)*/
> +#define PPC44x_PTE_ADD_SH 17 /*32 - PMD_SHIFT + PTE_SHIFT + 3*/
> +#define PPC44x_PTE_ADD_M1 18 /*32 - 3 - PTE_SHIFT*/
> +#define PPC44x_RPN_M2 13 /*31 - PAGE_SHIFT*/
For 256KB page size, I cannot understand why PTE_SHIFT is 11. Since
each PTE entry is 8 byte, PTE_SHIFT should have been 15. But then
there would be no bits in the Effective address for the 1st level
PGDIR offset. On what basis PTE_SHIFT of 11 is chosen? This overflow
problem happens only for 256KB page size.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-11 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-10 21:53 [RFC PATCH] Support for big page sizes on 44x Ilya Yanok
2008-09-10 21:53 ` [PATCH] powerpc: add support for PAGE_SIZEs greater than 4KB for Ilya Yanok
2008-09-11 16:57 ` prodyut hazarika [this message]
2008-09-11 18:15 ` Re[2]: " Yuri Tikhonov
2008-09-11 20:09 ` Josh Boyer
2008-09-11 23:38 ` Ilya Yanok
2008-09-12 0:47 ` Josh Boyer
2008-09-11 18:28 ` Ilya Yanok
2008-09-11 18:38 ` prodyut hazarika
2008-09-11 22:44 ` Ilya Yanok
2008-09-11 23:52 ` Re[2]: " Yuri Tikhonov
2008-09-11 18:53 ` prodyut hazarika
2008-09-11 21:51 ` Ilya Yanok
2008-09-13 17:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-13 23:37 ` Josh Boyer
2008-09-11 22:37 ` prodyut hazarika
2008-09-11 23:20 ` Re[2]: " Yuri Tikhonov
2008-09-12 3:48 ` David Gibson
2008-09-13 17:46 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-09-26 23:43 ` Ilya Yanok
2008-09-26 23:35 ` Ilya Yanok
2008-09-29 2:58 ` David Gibson
2008-09-10 21:53 ` [PATCH] mm: fix ENTRIES_PER_PAGEPAGE overflow with 256KB pages Ilya Yanok
2008-09-12 3:50 ` David Gibson
2008-09-12 5:29 ` prodyut hazarika
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=49c0ff980809110957h4b7b85d4ie39dbb27d1edbe39@mail.gmail.com \
--to=prodyuth@gmail.com \
--cc=dzu@denx.de \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=wd@denx.de \
--cc=yanok@emcraft.com \
/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).