Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 11:40:08AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>> We will use this later with THP changes to request for pmd table of double
>> the size.
>> THP code does PTE page allocation along with large page request and deposit
>> them
>> for later use. This is to ensure that we won't have any failures when we
>> split
>> huge pages to regular pages.
>>
>> On powerpc we want to use the deposited PTE page for storing hash pte slot
>> and
>> secondary bit information for the HPTEs. Hence we save them in the second
>> half
>> of the pmd table.
>
> That much is fine, but...
>
>> -void pgtable_cache_add(unsigned shift, void (*ctor)(void *));
>> +extern void __pgtable_cache_add(unsigned shift, unsigned long table_size,
>> + void (*ctor)(void *));
>> void pgtable_cache_init(void);
>> +static inline void pgtable_cache_add(unsigned shift, void (*ctor)(void *))
>> +{
>> + return __pgtable_cache_add(shift, sizeof(void *) << shift, ctor);
>> +}
>
> NAK to this (and in fact the rest of this patch).
>
> If you need twice the size, use the next slot along in pgtable_cache,
> which will give you the size you need, rather than breaking the
> relationship between slot index and allocation size.
That would mean we will have to do
static inline pmd_t *pmd_alloc_one(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
{
- return kmem_cache_alloc(PGT_CACHE(PMD_INDEX_SIZE),
+ return kmem_cache_alloc(PGT_CACHE(PMD_INDEX_SIZE + 1),
GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_REPEAT);
}
is that ok ?
-aneesh
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
