public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>,
	tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	macro@linux-mips.org, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com,
	eike-kernel@sf-tec.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: ioremap: fix wrong physical address handling
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 09:32:37 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C1ABEA5.9090701@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C1A2735.304@zytor.com>

(2010/06/17 22:46), H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 06/17/2010 02:35 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>>>
>>>> By the way, is there linux kernel limit regarding above 44-bits physical
>>>> address in x86_32 PAE? For example, pfn above 32-bits is not supported?
>>
>> That's an awkward situation.  I would tend to suggest that you not
>> support this type of machine with a 32-bit kernel.  Is it a sparse
>> memory system, or is there a device mapped in that range?
>>
>> I guess it would be possible to special-case ioremap to allow the
>> creation of such mappings, but I don't know what kind of system-wide
>> fallout would happen as a result.  The consequences of something trying
>> to extract a pfn from one of those ptes would be
>>
>>> There are probably places at which PFNs are held in 32-bit numbers,
>>> although it would be good to track them down if it isn't too expensive
>>> to fix them (i.e. doesn't affect generic code.)
>>>
>>
>> There are many places which hold pfns in 32 bit variables on 32 bit
>> systems; the standard type for pfns is "unsigned long", pretty much
>> everywhere in the kernel.  It might be worth defining a pfn_t and
>> converting usage over to that, but it would be a pervasive change.
>>
>
> I think you're right, and just making 2^44 work correctly would be good
> enough.  Doing special forwarding of all 52 bits of the real physical
> address in the paravirt case (where it is self-contained and doesn't
> spill into the rest of the kernel) would probably be a good thing, though.
>
> 	-hpa
>

I'll focus on making 2^44 work correctly. Then, I'll do the following
change in the next version of my patch.

- The v.2 patch uses resource_size_t for pfn. I'll keep using
   resource_size_t for pfn also in v.3, because there is no reason to
   leave it being "unsigned long".

- Use PHYSICAL_PAGE_MASK for masking physical address as v.1 patch
   did. I think changing the definition of PAGE_MASK is a little risky.

Thanks,
Kenji Kaneshige



  reply	other threads:[~2010-06-18  0:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-17  1:28 [BUG][PATCH 0/2 (v.2)] x86: ioremap() problem in X86_32 PAE Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  1:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: ioremap: fix wrong physical address handling Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  2:50   ` Matthew Wilcox
2010-06-17  4:22     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-17  4:55       ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  6:03         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-17  6:21           ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-17  9:35           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-06-17  9:38             ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-06-17 13:46             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-18  0:32               ` Kenji Kaneshige [this message]
2010-06-18  0:22             ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09  4:24             ` Simon Horman
2010-07-09  5:33               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-07-09  6:10                 ` Simon Horman
2010-06-17  6:28     ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09 18:31   ` [tip:x86/mm] x86, pae: Fix handling of large physical addresses in ioremap tip-bot for Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09 18:43     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-17  1:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: ioremap: fix normal ram range check Kenji Kaneshige
2010-07-09 18:31   ` [tip:x86/mm] x86, ioremap: Fix " tip-bot for Kenji Kaneshige
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-06-18  3:21 [BUG][PATCH 0/2 (v.3)] x86: ioremap() problem in X86_32 PAE Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-18  3:22 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: ioremap: fix wrong physical address handling Kenji Kaneshige
2010-06-18 11:07   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2010-06-21  1:40     ` Kenji Kaneshige

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=4C1ABEA5.9090701@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --to=kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=eike-kernel@sf-tec.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=macro@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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