From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752446Ab2GIHEI (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2012 03:04:08 -0400 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:33871 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751684Ab2GIHEF (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jul 2012 03:04:05 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Tejun Heo Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" , hacklu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <4FF06701.6010004@zytor.com> <4FF06DF4.4000006@zytor.com> <87wr2nsbvi.fsf@xmission.com> <4FF0769F.8090105@zytor.com> <87sjdbsb0v.fsf@xmission.com> <4FF07E66.2020706@zytor.com> <87d34fs914.fsf@xmission.com> <4FF085B1.6070604@zytor.com> <87a9zj9w43.fsf@xmission.com> <4FF098E2.3040307@zytor.com> <20120702165633.GA555@google.com> Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 00:03:58 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20120702165633.GA555@google.com> (Tejun Heo's message of "Mon, 2 Jul 2012 09:56:33 -0700") Message-ID: <87fw914dr5.fsf@xmission.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=98.207.153.68;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX19BoGrY4zRB136jrQLcA3anvB5wtipDxSE= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 98.207.153.68 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 0.1 XMSubLong Long Subject * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -3.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 T_TooManySym_02 5+ unique symbols in subject X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa04 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Tejun Heo X-Spam-Relay-Country: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86, boot: Optimize the elf header handling. X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Fri, 06 Aug 2010 16:31:04 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tejun Heo writes: > Hello, guys. > > On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 11:37:22AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> If we don't need it, I think we can use -z max-page-size=4096, but we >> use the PMD alignment for percpu on x86-64; Tejun, does that apply to >> the .data..percpu section in the executable as well? > > I don't think the .data..percpu section needs 2M alignment. The > percpu data section is only used as init template and actual percpu > addresses always go through offsetting against __per_cpu_offset[] - no > matter what the vaddrs in the vmlinux are, they get offsetted into 2M > aligned linear address if necessary. I think the only alignment > .data..percpu needs is cacheline alignment for separating its > subsections. Thanks. My basic testing isn't showing any problems. Of course all that changed was where in the vmlinux file not where in physical memory the data was loaded, so problems would really surprise me. Eric