Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v12 5/5] arm64: Allow huge io mappings again | From | Chintan Pandya <> | Date | Mon, 4 Jun 2018 19:12:57 +0530 |
| |
On 6/4/2018 5:44 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 06:09:18PM +0530, Chintan Pandya wrote: >> Huge mappings have had stability issues due to stale >> TLB entry and memory leak issues. Since, those are >> addressed in this series of patches, it is now safe >> to allow huge mappings. >> >> Signed-off-by: Chintan Pandya <cpandya@codeaurora.org> >> --- >> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 18 ++---------------- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c >> index 6e7e16c..c65abc4 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c >> @@ -934,15 +934,8 @@ int pud_set_huge(pud_t *pudp, phys_addr_t phys, pgprot_t prot) >> { >> pgprot_t sect_prot = __pgprot(PUD_TYPE_SECT | >> pgprot_val(mk_sect_prot(prot))); >> - pud_t new_pud = pfn_pud(__phys_to_pfn(phys), sect_prot); >> - >> - /* Only allow permission changes for now */ >> - if (!pgattr_change_is_safe(READ_ONCE(pud_val(*pudp)), >> - pud_val(new_pud))) >> - return 0; > > Do you actually need to remove these checks? If we're doing > break-before-make properly, then the check won't fire but it would be > good to keep it there so we can catch misuse of these in future. > > In other words, can we drop this patch?
Yes, we don't need this patch as BBM is happening before this. I missed that. I'll remove this patch in v13.
> > Will >
Chintan -- Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
| |