Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
Cc:     "open list\:TENSILICA XTENSA PORT \(xtensa\)" 
        <linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org>, Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] highmem: fix highmem for xtensa
In-Reply-To: <CAMo8BfKEr-89awEnV072uWR=4fniDRJ0drWmZrtnyvj-mANk0A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20201113122328.22942-1-jcmvbkbc@gmail.com> <87zh3ll6hw.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <CAMo8BfKEr-89awEnV072uWR=4fniDRJ0drWmZrtnyvj-mANk0A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:36:07 +0100
Message-ID: <87sg9dl3xk.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Max,

On Fri, Nov 13 2020 at 05:50, Max Filippov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 5:40 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 13 2020 at 04:23, Max Filippov wrote:
>> > Fixmap on xtensa grows upwards, i.e. bigger fixmap entry index
>> > corresponds to a higher virtual address. This was lost in highmem
>> > generalization resulting in the following runtime warnings:
>>
>> Sorry for not noticing.
>>
>> > Fix it by adding __ARCH_HAS_POSITIVE_FIXMAP macro and implementing
>> > vaddr_in_fixmap and fixmap_pte primitives differently depending on
>> > whether it is defined or not.
>>
>> What's wrong with just doing the obvious and making the fixmap defines
>> the other way round?
>
> It becomes really awkward when we get to support high memory with
> aliasing data cache: we must think about the actual virtual addresses
> assigned to pages and it feels much simpler when it's done this way.

Feeling are not really a technical argument. Is there any functional
difference which matters?

Thanks,

        tglx