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;
Date:   Sun, 24 Oct 2021 23:55:59 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     wefu@redhat.com
Cc:     anup.patel@wdc.com, atish.patra@wdc.com, palmerdabbelt@google.com,
        guoren@kernel.org, christoph.muellner@vrull.eu,
        philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu, hch@lst.de, liush@allwinnertech.com,
        lazyparser@gmail.com, drew@beagleboard.org,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        taiten.peng@canonical.com, aniket.ponkshe@canonical.com,
        heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com, gordan.markus@canonical.com,
        guoren@linux.alibaba.com, arnd@arndb.de, wens@csie.org,
        maxime@cerno.tech, dlustig@nvidia.com, gfavor@ventanamicro.com,
        andrea.mondelli@huawei.com, behrensj@mit.edu, xinhaoqu@huawei.com,
        huffman@cadence.com, mick@ics.forth.gr,
        allen.baum@esperantotech.com, jscheid@ventanamicro.com,
        rtrauben@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH V3 2/2] riscv: add RISC-V Svpbmt extension supports
Message-ID: <YXZU/3/YmRGFrOXK@infradead.org>
References: <20211025040607.92786-1-wefu@redhat.com>
 <20211025040607.92786-3-wefu@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20211025040607.92786-3-wefu@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 12:06:07PM +0800, wefu@redhat.com wrote:
>  static inline pmd_t *pud_pgtable(pud_t pud)
>  {
> -	return (pmd_t *)pfn_to_virt(pud_val(pud) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT);
> +	return (pmd_t *)pfn_to_virt((pud_val(pud) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK)
> +						>> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT);
>  }
>  
>  static inline struct page *pud_page(pud_t pud)
>  {
> -	return pfn_to_page(pud_val(pud) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT);
> +	return pfn_to_page((pud_val(pud) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK)
> +						>> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT);

>  static inline unsigned long _pmd_pfn(pmd_t pmd)
>  {
> -	return pmd_val(pmd) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT;
> +	return (pmd_val(pmd) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT;
>  }

The "(pud_val(pud) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT" expression begs
for readable and well-documented helper.

> +#define _SVPBMT_PMA		((unsigned long)0x0 << 61)
> +#define _SVPBMT_NC		((unsigned long)0x1 << 61)
> +#define _SVPBMT_IO		((unsigned long)0x2 << 61)

0UL << 61
1UL << 61
...

> +#define _SVPBMT_MASK		(_SVPBMT_PMA | _SVPBMT_NC | _SVPBMT_IO)
> +
> +extern struct __riscv_svpbmt_struct {
> +	unsigned long mask;
> +	unsigned long mt_pma;
> +	unsigned long mt_nc;
> +	unsigned long mt_io;
> +} __riscv_svpbmt;
> +
> +#define _PAGE_MT_MASK		__riscv_svpbmt.mask
> +#define _PAGE_MT_PMA		__riscv_svpbmt.mt_pma
> +#define _PAGE_MT_NC		__riscv_svpbmt.mt_nc
> +#define _PAGE_MT_IO		__riscv_svpbmt.mt_io

Using a struct over individual variables seems a little odd here.

Also why not use the standard names for these _PAGE bits used by
most other architectures?

> -	return (unsigned long)pfn_to_virt(pmd_val(pmd) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT);
> +	return (unsigned long)pfn_to_virt((pmd_val(pmd) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK) >> _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT);

Overly long line, could use a helper.  Btw, what is the point in having
this _PAGE_PFN_SHIFT macro to start with?