On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 06:11:18PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On 28/07/16 00:18, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c
> >> b/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c
> >> index 003ff48a11b6..f34ccdbe0fbd 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c
> >> @@ -343,7 +343,6 @@ void __init radix__early_init_mmu(void)
> >> __pte_frag_nr = H_PTE_FRAG_NR;
> >> __pte_frag_size_shift = H_PTE_FRAG_SIZE_SHIFT;
> >>
> >> - radix_init_page_sizes();
> >> if (!firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_LPAR)) {
> >> radix_init_native();
> >> lpcr = mfspr(SPRN_LPCR);
> >>
> >
> > If I am reading this correctly, radix_init_page_sizes() has become
> > radix__early_init_devtree() where as hash__early_init_devtree() initializes
> > both segment and page sizes? I would still like to keep
> >
> > mmu_early_init_devtree()
> > -> radix__early_init_devtree()
> > -> radix__init_page_sizes()
>
> But then radix__early_init_devtree() would just be:
>
> void radix__early_init_devtree(void)
> {
> radix__init_page_sizes();
> }
>
> Which seems silly.
>
But for a person parsing both hpte and radix bits, the code seems
saner and the compiler will do the right thing
> I'm doing a new version which splits the htab scanning from the page
> init more, as Ben suggested.
>
Sounds good
Balbir
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
