Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On 04/21/2017 03:05 AM, Andrea Reale wrote: > Hi all, > > thanks for taking the time to comment. Replies in-line. > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 08:53:13AM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: >> On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On 04/21/2017 03:05 AM, Andrea Reale wrote: > Hi all, > > thanks for taking the time to comment. Replies in-line. > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 08:53:13AM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: >> On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: On Fri,

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi all, thanks for taking the time to comment. Replies in-line. On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 08:53:13AM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: > >>On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100,

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi all, thanks for taking the time to comment. Replies in-line. On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 08:53:13AM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: > >>On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote:

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi all, Thanks Mark, Ard and Laura for your comments. Replies in-line. On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 07:21:26PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: [...] > > > > The name direct is inherited directly from the x86_64 hot remove code. > > It serves to distinguish if we are removing either a pagetable page that

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi all, Thanks Mark, Ard and Laura for your comments. Replies in-line. On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 07:21:26PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: [...] > > > > The name direct is inherited directly from the x86_64 hot remove code. > > It serves to distinguish if we are removing either a pagetable page that

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: I guess it is likely that I might have made assumptions that are true for x86_64 but do not hold for arm64. Whenever

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On 04/18/2017 11:48 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: I guess it is likely that I might have made assumptions that are true for x86_64 but do not hold for arm64. Whenever you feel this is the

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: >> I guess it is likely that I might have made assumptions that are true >> for x86_64 but do not hold for arm64. Whenever you feel this is the >> case, I would be

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On 18 April 2017 at 19:21, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: >> I guess it is likely that I might have made assumptions that are true >> for x86_64 but do not hold for arm64. Whenever you feel this is the >> case, I would be really grateful if you

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: > I guess it is likely that I might have made assumptions that are true > for x86_64 but do not hold for arm64. Whenever you feel this is the > case, I would be really grateful if you could help identify them. Sure thing. > On Tue,

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 03:01:58PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: > I guess it is likely that I might have made assumptions that are true > for x86_64 but do not hold for arm64. Whenever you feel this is the > case, I would be really grateful if you could help identify them. Sure thing. > On Tue,

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi Mark, thanks for your thorough feedback, it is really appreciated. I have a few comments and I'd like to ask for further clarification, if you don't mind, in order to help us work on a new version of the patch. Before I go into details, let me point out that, as you have noted yourself, the

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi Mark, thanks for your thorough feedback, it is really appreciated. I have a few comments and I'd like to ask for further clarification, if you don't mind, in order to help us work on a new version of the patch. Before I go into details, let me point out that, as you have noted yourself, the

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi, On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:55:42PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: > +static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vaddr(pmd_t pmd) > +{ > + return (unsigned long) __va(pmd_page_paddr(pmd)); > +} > + > /* Find an entry in the third-level page table. */ > #define pte_index(addr) (((addr)

Re: [PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

Hi, On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 03:55:42PM +0100, Andrea Reale wrote: > +static inline unsigned long pmd_page_vaddr(pmd_t pmd) > +{ > + return (unsigned long) __va(pmd_page_paddr(pmd)); > +} > + > /* Find an entry in the third-level page table. */ > #define pte_index(addr) (((addr)

[PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

- arch_remove_memory interface - kernel page tables cleanup - vmemmap_free implementation for arm64 Signed-off-by: Andrea Reale Signed-off-by: Maciej Bielski --- arch/arm64/Kconfig | 3 + arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu.h

[PATCH 4/5] Hot-remove implementation for arm64

- arch_remove_memory interface - kernel page tables cleanup - vmemmap_free implementation for arm64 Signed-off-by: Andrea Reale Signed-off-by: Maciej Bielski --- arch/arm64/Kconfig | 3 + arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu.h | 4 + arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable.h | 15 ++