Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-10-03 Thread Will Schmidt
On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 13:13 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: Will Schmidt writes: I still need to test this code for performance issues, and this version could still use some cosmetic touchups, so I dont think we want this to go into a tree yet. I am reposting this primarily to indicate the

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-10-02 Thread Paul Mackerras
Olof Johansson writes: This makes the kernel use 1TB segments for all kernel mappings and for user addresses of 1TB and above, on machines which support them (currently POWER5+ and POWER6). PA6T supports them as well :) In the patch, we don't actually hard-code the CPU_FTR_1T_SEGMENT

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-10-02 Thread Paul Mackerras
Will Schmidt writes: I still need to test this code for performance issues, and this version could still use some cosmetic touchups, so I dont think we want this to go into a tree yet. I am reposting this primarily to indicate the prior version isnt quite right, and so Jon can rebase to this

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-10-02 Thread Olof Johansson
On Wed, Oct 03, 2007 at 01:07:58PM +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: Olof Johansson writes: This makes the kernel use 1TB segments for all kernel mappings and for user addresses of 1TB and above, on machines which support them (currently POWER5+ and POWER6). PA6T supports them as well

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-08-06 Thread Jon Tollefson
Paul Mackerras wrote: diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/slb.c A couple of hunks fail in this file when applying to the current tree. ... diff --git a/include/asm-powerpc/mmu-hash64.h b/include/asm-powerpc/mmu-hash64.h index 695962f..053f86b 100644 ---

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-08-02 Thread Will Schmidt
Hi Paul, just a few questions. On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 12:04 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: This makes the kernel use 1TB segments for all kernel mappings and for user addresses of 1TB and above, on machines which support them (currently POWER5+ and POWER6). We don't currently use 1TB

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-08-02 Thread Benjamin Herrenschmidt
Is there technical reason why the 'local' variable remains at the end of the parm list for these? In other cases 'ssize' simply gets added to the end of the parm list. Looks nicer to have psize and ssize together :-) Ben. ___ Linuxppc-dev

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-08-02 Thread Will Schmidt
On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 08:37 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: Is there technical reason why the 'local' variable remains at the end of the parm list for these? In other cases 'ssize' simply gets added to the end of the parm list. Looks nicer to have psize and ssize together :-)

Re: [PATCH] Use 1TB segments

2007-08-02 Thread David Gibson
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 03:41:23PM -0500, Will Schmidt wrote: Hi Paul, just a few questions. [snip] +#define VSID_MULTIPLIER_256M ASM_CONST(200730139)/* 28-bit prime */ +#define VSID_MULTIPLIER_1T ASM_CONST(12538073) /* 24-bit prime */ Anything special in how this