From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934853AbcA1OuL (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 09:50:11 -0500
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:60765 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S932685AbcA1OuH (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 09:50:07 -0500
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Disallow combination of ARCH_XGENE and 16K page
 size
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org
References: <1453936230-7305-1-git-send-email-dann.frazier@canonical.com>
 <20160128103441.GS14823@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20160128110820.GE30928@arm.com> <20160128112033.GI17123@leverpostej>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Feng Kan <fkan@apm.com>,
        dann frazier <dann.frazier@canonical.com>, Duc Dang <dhdang@apm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Loc Ho <lho@apm.com>,
        Kumar Sankaran <ksankaran@apm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
From: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com>
Message-ID: <56AA2A9C.5080602@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 08:50:04 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160128112033.GI17123@leverpostej>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 01/28/2016 05:20 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:08:20AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 10:34:41AM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:

>> I thought there was also a suggestion that we could fail gracefully in
>> the EFI stub if we detected an unsupported page size?
>
> Yup. There are other things we could/should test, too.
>
> I believe Jeremy had a patch, but due to churn in that area it didn't
> get picked up.

I will clean-up and re-post that patch in the future too. It was fairly 
trivial so if someone feels the need for immediately...

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/14/948

IMHO, The main sticking point initially was that the correct place for 
the check was a moving target. That problem has been fixed, so it should 
be easy to move it.