From: Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@freescale.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Matt Porter <mporter@kernel.crashing.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev list <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
linux-ppc-embedded list <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: pte_update and 64-bit PTEs on PPC32?
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 01:51:08 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <93f533baba2b2f73ac9ec46b5401747e@freescale.com> (raw)
Paul,
I've tracked down a bug I've been having to the fact that pte_update
assumes a pte is a unsigned long. I need to look into what the exact
implications this has. I was wondering what the thoughts were with
respect to how this is suppose to work properly on 440 with its 64-bit
pte? I'm looking at a 64-bit pte for some Freescale book-e parts as we
move to 36-bit physical address support.
The problem I found was ptep_get_and_clear() would return back only a
32-bit value and thus we loose any information in the upper 32-bits. I
found the call in sys_mprotect ... -> change_pte_range ->
ptep_get_and_clear()
Will provide some update on this tomorrow.
- kumar
next reply other threads:[~2005-04-06 6:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-06 6:51 Kumar Gala [this message]
2005-04-06 6:53 ` pte_update and 64-bit PTEs on PPC32? Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-04-06 16:44 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-06 17:20 ` Chris Friesen
2005-04-06 17:58 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-06 21:33 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-08 8:26 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 14:08 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-08 18:44 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 19:01 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-08 21:04 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 21:31 ` Dan Malek
2005-04-08 21:44 ` Gabriel Paubert
2005-04-08 23:32 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-09 0:32 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-04-06 22:22 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-04-06 22:27 ` Kumar Gala
2005-04-07 11:15 ` 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=93f533baba2b2f73ac9ec46b5401747e@freescale.com \
--to=kumar.gala@freescale.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mporter@kernel.crashing.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).