[RFC PATCH 0/9] powerpc/mm: Restructure Linux PTE on Book3S/64 to radix format

Michael Ellerman mpe at ellerman.id.au
Mon Feb 22 11:30:47 AEDT 2016


On Sat, 2016-02-20 at 20:10 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> Paul Mackerras <paulus at samba.org> writes:
> 
> > This patch series modifies the Linux PTE format used on 64-bit Book3S
> > processors (i.e. POWER server processors) to make the bits line up
> > with the PTE format used in the radix trees defined in PowerISA v3.0.
> > This will reduce the amount of further change required to make a
> > kernel that can run with either a radix MMU or a hashed page table
> > (HPT) MMU.
> > 
> > This also changes the upper levels of the tree to use real addresses
> > rather than kernel virtual addresses - that is, we no longer have the
> > 0xc000... at the top of each PGD/PUD/PMD entry.  I made this change
> > for all 64-bit machines, both embedded and server.
> > 
> > The patch series is against v4.5-rc4 plus Aneesh's "powerpc/mm/hash:
> > Clear the invalid slot information correctly" patch.
> > 
> > I have compiled this for all the defconfigs in the tree, without
> > error.  I have tested this, with the fixes branch of the powerpc tree
> > merged in, both running bare-metal on a POWER8 and in a KVM guest on
> > that POWER8 system.  In the guest I tested both 4k and 64k configs,
> > with THP enabled; in the host I tested with 64k page size and THP
> > enabled.  All these tests ran fine, including running a KVM guest on
> > the bare-metal system.  So far I have done kernel compiles in a loop
> > as the test, but I plan to run LTP and possibly some other tests.
> > 
> > Comments welcome.
> 
> I was expecting some complex changes in asm and other part of the code. That
> is one of the reason I was holding of a series like this till I get the
> radix merged.

Yeah, but you actually rewrote most/all of that code in C as part of your
earlier refactoring :)

> Now how do we want to go with this series ?. If we are taking this
> series before the books3 hash linux abstraction series, I will have to
> redo that series now on top of this.

I'd prefer to merge this first.

I know you'll have to redo your series, but hopefully some of your series can
just go away, because we don't need to abstract the PTE bits anymore.

cheers



More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list