lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC/PATCH] mm: Pass virtual address to [__]p{te,ud,md}_free_tlb()
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 05:49:47PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> Upcoming paches to support the new 64-bit "BookE" powerpc architecture
> will need to have the virtual address corresponding to PTE page when
> freeing it, due to the way the HW table walker works.
>
> Basically, the TLB can be loaded with "large" pages that cover the whole
> virtual space (well, sort-of, half of it actually) represented by a PTE
> page, and which contain an "indirect" bit indicating that this TLB entry
> RPN points to an array of PTEs from which the TLB can then create direct
> entries.

RPN is PFN in ppc speak, right?


> Thus, in order to invalidate those when PTE pages are deleted,
> we need the virtual address to pass to tlbilx or tlbivax instructions.

Interesting arrangement. So are these last level ptes modifieable
from userspace or something? If not, I wonder if you could manage
them as another level of pointers with the existing pagetable
functions?


> The old trick of sticking it somewhere in the PTE page struct page sucks
> too much, the address is almost readily available in all call sites and
> almost everybody implemets these as macros, so we may as well add the
> argument everywhere. I added it to the pmd and pud variants for consistency.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> ---
>
> I would like to merge the new support that depends on this in 2.6.32,
> so unless there's major objections, I'd like this to go in early during
> the merge window. We can sort out separately how to carry the patch
> around in -next until then since the powerpc tree will have a dependency
> on it.

Can't see any problem with that.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-15 15:59    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans