From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Glauber de Oliveira Costa <glommer@gmail.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00 of 10] x86: unify asm/pgtable.h
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:35:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <478424DE.3030609@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080109011233.GD25945@bingen.suse.de>
Andi Kleen wrote:
>> of the if()? If not, can't we just remove it and avoid this present
>> problem?
>>
>
> That would just hide your problem.
>
The "problem" is a BUG() in pageattr_64.c:change_page_attr(), which to
me looks spurious. It arises because __PAGE_KERNEL_* doesn't contain
_PAGE_GLOBAL, but PAGE_KERNEL_* does. When ioremap()
change_page_attr(), it does so in a way that guarentees that the test
if (pgprot_val(prot) != pgprot_val(ref_prot)) {
in __change_page_attr() always succeeds. When I folded _PAGE_GLOBAL
into the __PAGE_KERNEL_* definitions, it mostly works except it causes
this if() to fail, falling into the otherwise dead else clause and
triggers a BUG().
I'm not really sure what the logic in here is supposed to be doing, but
it seems to me that it isn't the difference between global and
non-global mappings (I guess its really testing for cached vs uncached
mappings).
Or to put it another way, what's the underlying rationale for making
__PAGE_KERNEL_* not include the GLOBAL flag, but including it in the
pgprot versions? It means that code like this in ioremap_64.c:
err = change_page_attr_addr(vaddr,npages,__pgprot(__PAGE_KERNEL|flags));
is subtly different from using PAGE_KERNEL | flags, because the latter
also includes _PAGE_GLOBAL.
J
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-09 1:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-08 22:00 Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 01 of 10] x86: move all asm/pgtable constants into one place Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 02 of 10] x86: avoid name conflict for Voyager leave_mm Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 03 of 10] x86/pgtable: unify pagetable accessors Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 04 of 10] x86: unify pgtable accessors which use supported_pte_mask Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 05 of 10] x86: page.h: make pte_t a union to always include pte element Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 06 of 10] x86/vmi: fix compilation as a result of pte_t changes Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 07 of 10] x86: pgtable: unify pte accessors Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 08 of 10] x86: unify zero_page definition Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 09 of 10] x86: unify paravirt pagetable accessors Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:00 ` [PATCH 10 of 10] xen: mask out PWT too Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 9:17 ` Jan Beulich
2008-01-09 19:04 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 22:42 ` [PATCH 00 of 10] x86: unify asm/pgtable.h Ingo Molnar
2008-01-08 23:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-08 23:23 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-08 23:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-08 23:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-08 23:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:13 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 0:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:55 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 1:09 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 1:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 1:18 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 1:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 1:37 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 1:21 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 1:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 0:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 0:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 1:07 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 1:12 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 1:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 1:35 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-01-09 1:42 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 1:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 2:11 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 3:22 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-01-09 10:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 10:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-09 14:26 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 9:37 ` Jan Beulich
2008-01-09 1:11 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-09 0:07 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=478424DE.3030609@goop.org \
--to=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=glommer@gmail.com \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome