public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ia64 broken by transparent huge pages - other arches too?
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2011 16:59:25 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110115155925.GT9506@random.random> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295076096.4875.60.camel@pasglop>

On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 06:21:36PM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> This is insane. Having such a massively invasive change to the whole mm,
> barely tested on most architecture, and last I heard still generally
> controversial being merged like that without even some integration
> testing via -next makes no sense.

This is 99% a noop for all archs but x86.. Really if you worry about
the testing you should worry about x86 only! Only x86 is affected by
the brainer part of the code, and only if TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE=y
(which is set to N by default).

Not x86 archs can't possibly have a regression because of this. The
reason there's this compile trouble is that I cleaned up some bad code
in include/asm-generic/pgtable.h while adding the pmd methods, and I
tried to keep everything as a static inline as requested by Mel for
better gcc compile time validation than what the preprocessor can
do. Otherwise if it was a macro I may not have had to return
anything and I could just BUG() in this pmd method that requires the
__pmd macro to be implemented by all archs (I think it's better off if
__pmd is available considering __pte seems already available).

The below can't introduce regressions, if it builds it'll work, so the
testing on -next for the other archs isn't really necessary at all. I
don't think you can worry about a one liner change to make ia64 build,
when the brainer part of the code is a noop for the other archs
(including x86 when the config option is off).

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-15 15:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-14 17:50 ia64 broken by transparent huge pages - other arches too? Luck, Tony
2011-01-14 18:30 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-01-14 18:50   ` Tony Luck
2011-01-14 19:03     ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-01-15  7:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-01-15 15:59   ` Andrea Arcangeli [this message]
2011-01-15 16:47     ` James Bottomley
2011-01-15 17:23       ` Andrea Arcangeli
2011-01-15 19:02         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-01-15 21:31         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-01-16 21:05   ` Linus Torvalds
2011-01-16 21:10     ` Andrew Morton
2011-01-16 22:06       ` Andrea Arcangeli

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=20110115155925.GT9506@random.random \
    --to=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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