Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Apr 2022 14:27:07 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH -next v4 1/4] mm: page_table_check: move pxx_user_accessible_page into x86 | From | Tong Tiangen <> |
| |
在 2022/4/21 11:44, Anshuman Khandual 写道: > > > On 4/21/22 08:35, Tong Tiangen wrote: >> >> >> 在 2022/4/21 0:44, Pasha Tatashin 写道: >>> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 2:45 AM Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@huawei.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 在 2022/4/19 17:29, Anshuman Khandual 写道: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 4/18/22 09:14, Tong Tiangen wrote: >>>>>> --- a/mm/page_table_check.c >>>>>> +++ b/mm/page_table_check.c >>>>>> @@ -10,6 +10,14 @@ >>>>>> #undef pr_fmt >>>>>> #define pr_fmt(fmt) "page_table_check: " fmt >>>>>> >>>>>> +#ifndef PMD_PAGE_SIZE >>>>>> +#define PMD_PAGE_SIZE PMD_SIZE >>>>>> +#endif >>>>>> + >>>>>> +#ifndef PUD_PAGE_SIZE >>>>>> +#define PUD_PAGE_SIZE PUD_SIZE >>>>>> +#endif >>>>> >>>>> Why cannot PMD_SIZE/PUD_SIZE be used on every platform instead ? What is the >>>>> need for using PUD_PAGE_SIZE/PMD_PAGE_SIZE ? Are they different on x86 ? >>>>> . >>>> >>>> Hi, Pasha: >>>> I checked the definitions of PMD_SIZE/PUD_SIZE and >>>> PUD_PAGE_SIZE/PMD_PAGE_SIZE in x86 architecture and their use outside >>>> the architecture(eg: in mm/, all used PMD_SIZE/PUD_SIZE), Would it be >>>> better to use a unified PMD_SIZE/PUD_SIZE here? >>> >>> Hi Tong, >>> >>> Yes, it makes sense to use PMD_SIZE/PUD_SIZE instead of >>> PUD_PAGE_SIZE/PMD_PAGE_SIZE in page_table_check to be inline with the >>> rest of the mm/ >>> >>> Pasha >>> >> Hi Pasha and Anshuman: >> >> OK, Functional correctness is not affected here, i plan to optimize this point after this patchset is merged. > > As page table check is now being proposed to be supported on multiple platforms i.e > arm64, riscv besides just x86, it should not have any architecture specific macros > or functions. Hence please do generalize these PMD/PUD sizes in this series itself. > .
OK, will resend.
Thank you. Tong.
| |