From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60421) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Taoxc-0004vO-Qc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 09:38:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaoxW-0006Io-TR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 09:38:00 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53636 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TaoxW-0006IT-NP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Nov 2012 09:37:54 -0500 Message-ID: <50AB95BE.1090406@suse.de> Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 15:37:50 +0100 From: Alexander Graf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1353418270-23881-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <1353418270-23881-9-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <50AB8B95.8000106@suse.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [kvmarm] [RFC v4 8/8] oslib-posix: Align to permit transparent hugepages on ARM Linux List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Christoffer Dall Cc: Peter Maydell , kvm@vger.kernel.org, patches@linaro.org, Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= , Blue Swirl , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu On 11/20/2012 02:55 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> On 11/20/2012 02:31 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> ARM Linux (like x86-64 Linux) can use transparent hugepages for >>> KVM if memory blocks are 2MiB aligned; set QEMU_VMALLOC_ALIGN >>> accordingly. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell >>> --- >>> oslib-posix.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/oslib-posix.c b/oslib-posix.c >>> index 9db9c3d..d25b52a 100644 >>> --- a/oslib-posix.c >>> +++ b/oslib-posix.c >>> @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ >>> extern int daemon(int, int); >>> #endif >>> >>> -#if defined(__linux__)&& defined(__x86_64__) >>> +#if defined(__linux__)&& (defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__arm__)) >> >> Why not just drop the arch specific bit? >> >> > other archs have other alignment requirements, iirc. Ah, sorry, missed the rest of the lines around this one :). Yeah, should be ok then. Alex