Le 19/09/2016 à 07:45, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
Christophe Leroy writes:
Today there are two implementations of hugetlbpages which are managed
by exclusive #ifdefs:
* FSL_BOOKE: several directory entries points to the same single hugepage
* BOOK3S: one upper level
Le 20/09/2016 à 04:28, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
christophe leroy writes:
Le 19/09/2016 à 07:50, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
Christophe Leroy writes:
+#else
+static void hugepd_free(struct mmu_gather *tlb, void *hugepte)
+{
+
christophe leroy writes:
>>
>>
>>> for (psize = 0; psize < MMU_PAGE_COUNT; ++psize) {
>>> unsigned shift;
>>> unsigned pdshift;
>>> @@ -860,16 +807,31 @@ static int __init hugetlbpage_init(void)
>>> * if we have pdshift and shift
christophe leroy writes:
> Le 19/09/2016 à 07:50, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
>>
>> Christophe Leroy writes:
>>> +#else
>>> +static void hugepd_free(struct mmu_gather *tlb, void *hugepte)
>>> +{
>>> + BUG();
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> #endif
>>
>>
>> I
Le 19/09/2016 à 07:50, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
Christophe Leroy writes:
+#else
+static void hugepd_free(struct mmu_gather *tlb, void *hugepte)
+{
+ BUG();
+}
+
#endif
I was expecting that BUG will get removed in the next patch. But I don't
see it in the
Le 19/09/2016 à 07:45, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit :
Christophe Leroy writes:
Today there are two implementations of hugetlbpages which are managed
by exclusive #ifdefs:
* FSL_BOOKE: several directory entries points to the same single hugepage
* BOOK3S: one upper level
Christophe Leroy writes:
> +#else
> +static void hugepd_free(struct mmu_gather *tlb, void *hugepte)
> +{
> + BUG();
> +}
> +
> #endif
I was expecting that BUG will get removed in the next patch. But I don't
see it in the next patch. Considering
@@ -475,11 +453,10
Christophe Leroy writes:
> Today there are two implementations of hugetlbpages which are managed
> by exclusive #ifdefs:
> * FSL_BOOKE: several directory entries points to the same single hugepage
> * BOOK3S: one upper level directory entry points to a table of hugepages