On 8/10/21 6:50 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 12:32:37PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> All instances here could just directly test against CONFIG_ARM64_XXK_PAGES
>> instead of evaluating via PAGE_SHIFT or PAGE_SIZE. With this change, there
>> will be no such usage left.
>>
>> Cc: Marc Zyngier <[email protected]>
>> Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Alexandru Elisei <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c | 6 +++---
>> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 2 +-
>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Why is this better?
There are two improvements here.
1. Avoids using hard coded numerical shift values to determine the page size
e.g PAGE_SHIFT = 16 for 64K
2. There are already instances of IS_ENABLED() construct checking for the page
size. After this change there will be just a single method to test page size
, rather than checking for either config, PAGE_SHIFT or PAGE_SIZE etc through
out arm64. This change helps in that unification around IS_ENABLED().
There is another patch which drops remaining usage for PAGE_SIZE as well.
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/[email protected]/
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
