Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] arch: consolidate existing CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_*KB definitions

2024-03-06 Thread Michael Ellerman
Hi Arnd, Arnd Bergmann writes: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > These four architectures define the same Kconfig symbols for configuring > the page size. Move the logic into a common place where it can be shared > with all other architectures. > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann > --- > Changes from v1:

Re: [v2 PATCH 0/3] arch: mm, vdso: consolidate PAGE_SIZE definition

2024-03-06 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, Mar 06 2024 at 15:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > Naresh noticed that the newly added usage of the PAGE_SIZE macro in > include/vdso/datapage.h introduced a build regression. I had an older > patch that I revived to have this defined through Kconfig rather than >

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arch: define CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_*KB on all architectures

2024-03-06 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, Mar 06 2024 at 15:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > Most architectures only support a single hardcoded page size. In order > to ensure that each one of these sets the corresponding Kconfig symbols, > change over the PAGE_SHIFT definition to the common one and allow >

Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] arch: simplify architecture specific page size configuration

2024-03-06 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, Mar 06 2024 at 15:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > arc, arm64, parisc and powerpc all have their own Kconfig symbols > in place of the common CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_4KB symbols. Change these > so the common symbols are the ones that are actually used, while > leaving the

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] arch: consolidate existing CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_*KB definitions

2024-03-06 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, Mar 06 2024 at 15:14, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > These four architectures define the same Kconfig symbols for configuring > the page size. Move the logic into a common place where it can be shared > with all other architectures. > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann

Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] arch: define CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_*KB on all architectures

2024-03-06 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 3:15 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann > > Most architectures only support a single hardcoded page size. In order > to ensure that each one of these sets the corresponding Kconfig symbols, > change over the PAGE_SHIFT definition to the common one and allow >

[PATCH v2 3/3] arch: define CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_*KB on all architectures

2024-03-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
From: Arnd Bergmann Most architectures only support a single hardcoded page size. In order to ensure that each one of these sets the corresponding Kconfig symbols, change over the PAGE_SHIFT definition to the common one and allow only the hardware page size to be selected. Acked-by: Guo Ren

[PATCH v2 2/3] arch: simplify architecture specific page size configuration

2024-03-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
From: Arnd Bergmann arc, arm64, parisc and powerpc all have their own Kconfig symbols in place of the common CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_4KB symbols. Change these so the common symbols are the ones that are actually used, while leaving the arhcitecture specific ones as the user visible place for

[PATCH v2 1/3] arch: consolidate existing CONFIG_PAGE_SIZE_*KB definitions

2024-03-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
From: Arnd Bergmann These four architectures define the same Kconfig symbols for configuring the page size. Move the logic into a common place where it can be shared with all other architectures. Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann --- Changes from v1: - improve Kconfig help texts - fix Hexagon

[v2 PATCH 0/3] arch: mm, vdso: consolidate PAGE_SIZE definition

2024-03-06 Thread Arnd Bergmann
From: Arnd Bergmann Naresh noticed that the newly added usage of the PAGE_SIZE macro in include/vdso/datapage.h introduced a build regression. I had an older patch that I revived to have this defined through Kconfig rather than through including asm/page.h, which is not allowed in vdso code.

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/14] Introducing TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag

2024-03-06 Thread Vincent Guittot
On Wed, 6 Mar 2024 at 11:18, K Prateek Nayak wrote: > > Hello Vincent, > > Thank you for taking a look at the series. > > On 3/6/2024 3:29 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > > Hi Prateek, > > > > Adding Julia who could be interested in this patchset. Your patchset > > should trigger idle load balance

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/14] Introducing TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag

2024-03-06 Thread K Prateek Nayak
Hello Vincent, Thank you for taking a look at the series. On 3/6/2024 3:29 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote: > Hi Prateek, > > Adding Julia who could be interested in this patchset. Your patchset > should trigger idle load balance instead of newly idle load balance > now when the polling is used. This

Re: [RFC PATCH 00/14] Introducing TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag

2024-03-06 Thread Vincent Guittot
Hi Prateek, Adding Julia who could be interested in this patchset. Your patchset should trigger idle load balance instead of newly idle load balance now when the polling is used. This was one reason for not migrating task in idle CPU On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 at 18:15, K Prateek Nayak wrote: > >