From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin)
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [CFT][PATCH] 2.6.4-rc1 remove x86 boot page tables
Date: 02 Mar 2004 10:56:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1y8qj3zfl.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c21amp$769$1@terminus.zytor.com>
hpa@zytor.com (H. Peter Anvin) writes:
> Followup to: <m1vflp81kq.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com>
> By author: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
> In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > I think I have accounted for the sub architectures but I don't have
> > the hardware to test them. For voyager and VISWS I actually changed
> > some code so I would appreciate a confirmation I didn't break
> > anything.
> >
>
> For VISWS I think you actually need to turn paging off explicitly.
Hmm. I will look at that.
> Also, you probably need to check that you didn't break 4G/4G,
> especially on SMP.
The patch will need a few tweaks but it should be fairly straight forward.
> I would also like to remove the magic %bx, which I did in the version
> of my patch sent to akpm and which is now in -mm (basically the SMP
> trampoline jumps to a different entrypoint instead.) In that patch,
> %ebx is still used as a flag, but it's completely internal to head.S.
Ok I have not seen that one. In this case there was enough common
code that it seemed reasonable to reuse it. I managed to reduce
the code to two tests. With just a bit of care I suspect I could
remove the tests completely.
> See ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hpa/earlymem-7.diff
>
> > Thanks to HPA who got the ball started :)
>
> :)
>
> I definitely agree that simply using no paging until we have page
> tables is by far the cleanest approach. I felt that is was too high
> risk for 2.6, basically because I'm a chicken, but more realistically
> because I couldn't really see the effect on all subarchitectures, and
> I didn't feel 100% confident that there wasn't anything that relied on
> memory being dual mapped; however, I'm more than happy to be proven
> wrong :)
I will try. So far except for early_printk I have not found anything.
And that was easy to fix.
> Oh yes, with this change you should probably just move swapper_pg_dir
> (and empty_zero_page?) into .bss like anything else that should be
> zero after boot.
Sounds like a good idea.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-02 18:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-01 7:32 Eric W. Biederman
2004-03-01 19:05 ` Dave Hansen
2004-03-02 5:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-03-02 6:47 ` H. Peter Anvin
2004-03-02 12:53 ` [PATCH] Clean up empty_zero_page abuse Brian Gerst
2004-03-02 17:56 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2004-03-02 9:21 ` [CFT][PATCH] 2.6.4-rc1 remove x86 boot page tables H. Peter Anvin
2004-03-01 18:13 Tolentino, Matthew E
2004-03-02 5:36 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-03-03 6:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-03-03 8:15 ` Eric W. Biederman
2004-03-03 19:45 Tolentino, Matthew E
2004-03-05 14:23 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=m1y8qj3zfl.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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®