Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752990AbaJ1ARw (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:17:52 -0400 Received: from e23smtp02.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.144]:59036 "EHLO e23smtp02.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752369AbaJ1ARu (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:17:50 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 From: Ian Munsie To: Michael Ellerman Cc: cbe-oss-dev , mikey , arnd , jk , greg , linux-kernel , linuxppc-dev , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , anton Subject: Re: CXL: Fix PSL error due to duplicate segment table entries In-reply-to: <20141027064100.D12B514007D@ozlabs.org> References: <20141027064100.D12B514007D@ozlabs.org> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 11:17:47 +1100 Message-Id: <1414455360-sup-2142@delenn.ozlabs.ibm.com> User-Agent: Sup/0.20.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14102800-0005-0000-0000-000000EA4512 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Excerpts from Michael Ellerman's message of 2014-10-27 17:41:00 +1100: > On Mon, 2014-27-10 at 04:24:35 UTC, Ian Munsie wrote: > > From: Ian Munsie > > > > In certain circumstances the PSL can send an interrupt for a segment > > Define PSL before using it please. ok > > The CXL driver did not expect this situation and did not check if a > > does not and does not, you haven't patched it yet. ok > > Some of the code has been refactored to simplify it - the segment table > > hash has been moved from cxl_load_segment to find_free_sste where it is > > Any reason that's not a separate patch? ok, I'll split it. > > used and we have disabled the secondary hash in the segment table to > > reduce the number of entries that need to be tested from 16 to 8. Due to > > the large segment sizes we use it is extremely unlikely that the > > secondary hash would ever have been used in practice, so this should not > > have any negative impacts and may even improve performance. > > Any reason that's not a separate patch? ok, I'll split it. > > copro_calculate_slb will now mask the ESID by the correct mask for 1T vs > > Didn't, but will after this patch? ok, will reword > > 256M segments. This has no effect by itself as the extra bits were > > ignored, but it makes debugging the segment table entries easier and > > means that we can directly compare the ESID values for duplicates > > without needing to worry about masking in the comparison. > > Separate patch? ok, I'll split it. Cheers, -Ian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/