Re: [PATCH v2 02/17] powerpc/cell: Move data segment faulting code out of cell platform

Michael Neuling
2014-10-02T00:58:06Z

On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 15:23 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org> writes:
>
> > From: Ian Munsie <imunsie@au1.ibm.com>
> >
> > __spu_trap_data_seg() currently contains code to determine the VSID and ESID
> > required for a particular EA and mm struct.
> >
> > This code is generically useful for other co-processors. This moves the code
> > of the cell platform so it can be used by other powerpc code. It also adds 1TB
> > segment handling which Cell didn't have.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Munsie <imunsie@au1.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu-hash64.h | 7 ++++-
> > arch/powerpc/mm/copro_fault.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c | 3 ---
> > arch/powerpc/platforms/cell/spu_base.c | 41 +++--------------------------
> > 4 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu-hash64.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu-hash64.h
> > index d765144..6d0b7a2 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu-hash64.h
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/mmu-hash64.h
> > @@ -189,7 +189,12 @@ static inline unsigned int mmu_psize_to_shift(unsigned int mmu_psize)
> > #define LP_MASK(i) ((0xFF >> (i)) << LP_SHIFT)
> >
> > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> > -
> > +static inline int slb_vsid_shift(int ssize)
> > +{
> > + if (ssize == MMU_SEGSIZE_256M)
> > + return SLB_VSID_SHIFT;
> > + return SLB_VSID_SHIFT_1T;
> > +}
> > static inline int segment_shift(int ssize)
> > {
> > if (ssize == MMU_SEGSIZE_256M)
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/copro_fault.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/copro_fault.c
> > index ba7df14..b865697 100644
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/copro_fault.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/copro_fault.c
> > @@ -90,3 +90,51 @@ out_unlock:
> > return ret;
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(copro_handle_mm_fault);
> > +
> > +int copro_data_segment(struct mm_struct *mm, u64 ea, u64 *esid, u64 *vsid)
> > +{
> > + int psize, ssize;
> > +
> > + *esid = (ea & ESID_MASK) | SLB_ESID_V;
> > +
> > + switch (REGION_ID(ea)) {
> > + case USER_REGION_ID:
> > + pr_devel("copro_data_segment: 0x%llx -- USER_REGION_ID\n", ea);
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MM_SLICES
> > + psize = get_slice_psize(mm, ea);
> > +#else
> > + psize = mm->context.user_psize;
> > +#endif
> > + ssize = user_segment_size(ea);
> > + *vsid = (get_vsid(mm->context.id, ea, ssize)
> > + << slb_vsid_shift(ssize)) | SLB_VSID_USER;
> > + break;
> > + case VMALLOC_REGION_ID:
> > + pr_devel("copro_data_segment: 0x%llx -- VMALLOC_REGION_ID\n", ea);
> > + if (ea < VMALLOC_END)
> > + psize = mmu_vmalloc_psize;
> > + else
> > + psize = mmu_io_psize;
> > + ssize = mmu_kernel_ssize;
> > + *vsid = (get_kernel_vsid(ea, mmu_kernel_ssize)
> > + << SLB_VSID_SHIFT) | SLB_VSID_KERNEL;
>
> why not
> *vsid = (get_kernel_vsid(ea, mmu_kernel_ssize)
> << slb_vsid_shift(ssize)) | SLB_VSID_KERNEL;
>
> for vmalloc and kernel region ? We could end up using 1T segments for kernel mapping too.

Yep, but I'm going to do this in patch 10 where the other optimisations
are for this.

Mikey