Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262112AbUDPDEc (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2004 23:04:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262043AbUDPDEc (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2004 23:04:32 -0400 Received: from fmr03.intel.com ([143.183.121.5]:29578 "EHLO hermes.sc.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261603AbUDPDE2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2004 23:04:28 -0400 Message-Id: <200404160301.i3G31tF13237@unix-os.sc.intel.com> From: "Chen, Kenneth W" To: "'David Gibson'" Cc: , , , , "'Andy Whitcroft'" , "Andrew Morton" Subject: RE: hugetlb demand paging patch part [0/3] Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:01:55 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AcQjW6s78FC/52c1RWOi/7c+GKqpLgAAx8DQ In-Reply-To: <20040416013033.GC12735@zax> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2049 Lines: 42 David Gibson wrote on Thursday, April 15, 2004 6:31 PM > On Thu, Apr 15, 2004 at 10:08:22AM -0700, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > > >>>> David Gibson wrote on Wednesday, April 14, 2004 11:43 PM > > > > > > > > Some caveats: I don't have sh and sparc64 hardware to test. But hugetlb > > > > code in these two arch looked like a triplet twin of x86 code. So I'm > > > > pretty sure it will work right out of box. I've monkeyed around with > > > > ppc64 code and after a while I realized it should be left for the experts. > > > > I'm sure there are plenty ppc64 developers out there that can get it done > > > > in no time. > > > > > > To the extent that I understand your patches, it shouldn't be that > > > hard to adapt for ppc64, with one caveat: on ppc64, unlike the other > > > hugepage archs, the format of hugepage PTEs is not identical to the > > > format of normal PTEs. So to do this for ppc64, the generic parts of > > > your code will need to use a hugepte_t instead of pte_t - it can be > > > typedeffed to pte_t on archs other than ppc64. Likewise there will > > > need to be hugepte_none() and so forth macros. > > > > I think it would be cleaner if ppc64 change its format instead of changing > > 4 other arch to accommodate ppc64. By the way, why do you need to special > > typedef hugepte_t? pte for huge page aren't anything special on all other > > arches. > > The hugepte entries go in the same slots as pmd entries, which means > they must be compatible with the layout of pmd entries. That's not > compatible with making them identical to normal PTE entries. For one > thing, normal PTE entries are 64 bits wide, whereas PMD entries are > only 32 bits wide. It smells like handle_hugetlb_mm_fault() need to be replicated in each arch (or at least replicated in ppc64). - Ken - 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/