Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936436AbdGTWEQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:04:16 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:51237 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935026AbdGTWEL (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jul 2017 18:04:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 15:03:58 -0700 From: Ram Pai To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com, arnd@arndb.de, akpm@linux-foundation.org, corbet@lwn.net, mingo@redhat.com, mhocko@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC v6 01/62] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 4K backed HPTE pages Reply-To: Ram Pai References: <1500177424-13695-1-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <1500177424-13695-2-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com> <87d18vr6yw.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87d18vr6yw.fsf@skywalker.in.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17072022-0028-0000-0000-0000080F35EC X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00007395; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000214; SDB=6.00890469; UDB=6.00444894; IPR=6.00670636; BA=6.00005482; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00016302; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2017-07-20 22:04:09 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17072022-0029-0000-0000-000036C56F4C Message-Id: <20170720220358.GH5487@ram.oc3035372033.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-07-20_12:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1706020000 definitions=main-1707200340 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 953 Lines: 23 On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:21:51AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > ..... > > > /* > > @@ -116,8 +104,8 @@ int __hash_page_4K(unsigned long ea, unsigned long access, unsigned long vsid, > > * On hash insert failure we use old pte value and we don't > > * want slot information there if we have a insert failure. > > */ > > - old_pte &= ~(H_PAGE_HASHPTE | H_PAGE_F_GIX | H_PAGE_F_SECOND); > > - new_pte &= ~(H_PAGE_HASHPTE | H_PAGE_F_GIX | H_PAGE_F_SECOND); > > + old_pte &= ~(H_PAGE_HASHPTE); > > + new_pte &= ~(H_PAGE_HASHPTE); > > goto htab_insert_hpte; > > } > > With the current path order and above hunk we will breaks the bisect I guess. With the above, when > we convert a 64k hpte to 4khpte, since this is the first patch, we > should clear that H_PAGE_F_GIX and H_PAGE_F_SECOND. We still use them > for 64k. I guess you should move this hunk to second patch. true. it should move to the next patch. Will fix it. RP