From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
To: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: Assert NR_BM_PUD_TABLES for bm_pud[]
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 09:13:54 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <791773e4-9590-4093-a916-a02981633d16@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32030401-06d3-40ad-a0b6-fbd366092f2b@arm.com>
On 07/01/2026 09:07, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>
>
> On 07/01/26 2:03 PM, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 07/01/2026 06:16, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>> There is an implicit assumption about bm_pud[] being single entry PUD table
>>> just like bp_pmd[] which is a single entry PMD table. Though only the later
>>> gets asserted via NR_BM_PMD_TABLES. Hence let's add a similar check for PUD
>>> table as well.
>>>
>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>>> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm64/mm/fixmap.c | 3 +++
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/fixmap.c b/arch/arm64/mm/fixmap.c
>>> index c5c5425791da..e02594be8b8e 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/fixmap.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/fixmap.c
>>> @@ -23,8 +23,11 @@ static_assert(FIXADDR_TOT_START > PCI_IO_END);
>>> SPAN_NR_ENTRIES(FIXADDR_TOT_START, FIXADDR_TOP, PMD_SHIFT)
>>> #define NR_BM_PMD_TABLES \
>>> SPAN_NR_ENTRIES(FIXADDR_TOT_START, FIXADDR_TOP, PUD_SHIFT)
>>> +#define NR_BM_PUD_TABLES \
>>> + SPAN_NR_ENTRIES(FIXADDR_TOT_START, FIXADDR_TOP, P4D_SHIFT)
>>>
>>> static_assert(NR_BM_PMD_TABLES == 1);
>>> +static_assert(NR_BM_PUD_TABLES == 1);
>>
>> But if there is only one PMD table, there must only be one PUD table (and one
>> P4D table, and one PGD table) by definition. So I don't think this is checking
>> anything that the existing PMD table check is not.
>
> Agreed but should not this check help tighten this code up given that bm_pud[]
> array gets used for possible PUD entries ?
I don't see the value of it myself, given the PMD assert is already doing the
required check.
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ryan
>>
>>>
>>> #define __BM_TABLE_IDX(addr, shift) \
>>> (((addr) >> (shift)) - (FIXADDR_TOT_START >> (shift)))
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-07 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-07 6:16 Anshuman Khandual
2026-01-07 8:33 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-07 9:07 ` Anshuman Khandual
2026-01-07 9:13 ` Ryan Roberts [this message]
2026-01-07 10:11 ` Mark Rutland
2026-01-08 4:04 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=791773e4-9590-4093-a916-a02981633d16@arm.com \
--to=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®