Scott Wood <scottw...@freescale.com> writes: > On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 19:45 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> On Wed, 2015-06-17 at 08:21 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >> > "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.ku...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >> > >> > >> > Hi Scott, >> > >> > > Current swap encoding in pte can't support large pfns >> > > above 4TB. Change the swap encoding such that we put >> > > the swap type in the PTE bits. Also add build checks >> > > to make sure we don't overlap with HPTEFLAGS. >> > > >> > >> > Can you please review this w.r.t 64bit booke ? > > It looks OK. > > I'm curious why _PAGE_BIT_SWAP_TYPE is 2 -- it seems like it could be > any value >= 1 that isn't large enough to cause a conflict. Does > something get stored in that second bit?
Yes, we should be able to use >= 1. But then our _PAGE_USER is also used to indicate prot_none. It should really be _PAGE_PRESENT set and _PAGE_USER cleared. So for the swap case we should be ok to use _PAGE_USER. But i didn't want to audit all the asm code. So i decided to leave _PAGE_USER as it is. > >> I booted it on our p5020ds FWIW. > > Actively using swap? > -aneesh _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
