LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables.
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 10:46:25 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080205104625.60fa86b0.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1202222388.25021.20.camel@localhost>

On Tue, 05 Feb 2008 15:39:47 +0100 Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-02-04 at 02:51 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > Look: I can't fix *everyone's* stuff.  This was a consequence of ongoing
> > > > unbounded churn in the x86 tree.  If we can find a way of preventing those
> > > > guys (and everyone else) from trashing everyone else's stuff then we'd have
> > > > much smoother sailing.
> > > 
> > > Understood. That is where I jump in and regenerate my patches on the
> > > latest available level. That the patches did hold up for some months in
> > > -mm now without really breaking anything is an indication that we can
> > > push them upstream now, isn't ? That would make the patch problem go
> > > away and I could queue my s390 specific page table rework. Our KVM
> > > people keep asking about it.
> > 
> > yes, against 2.6.24-mm1 would be good, thanks.  I really don't know what
> > went wrong in i386 but I ended up getting all grumpy at the macro mess
> > we've made in all the pagetable handling.  Please do take a look at
> > improving that.
> 
> I'm trying to replace the __pte_free_tlb macros my patch touches for the
> different architectures. Not much luck yet, there is a reason why
> __pte_free_tlb is a macro in the first place: welcome to #include hell.
> I'm starting to get grumpy as well..
> 
> Just an example for x86-64:
> * asm-x86/tlb.h includes asm-generic/tlb.h
> * asm-generic/tlb.h includes asm-x86/pgalloc.h
> * asm-x86/pgalloc.h includes asm-x86/pgalloc_64.h
> * asm-x86/pgalloc_64.h includes asm-x86/tlb.h
> * since asm-x86/tlb.h started this #include chain it expands to nothing
> * asm-x86/pgalloc_64.h calls tlb_remove_page which is defined in
>   asm-x86/tlb.h but the compiler hasn't seen the definition yet
> * you loose..
> 
> I got x86-64 compiled by removing the #include <asm/pgalloc.h> from
> asm-generic/tlb.h. But who knows what will break if the include is
> missing .. I'll cross compile some of the other architectures next.
> 

urgh, well, thanks for trying.  If there's significant risk factor (or
hassle) in fixing the macros then I'd suggest we not do it for now - it's a
separate project.

At least x86 is getting better in that regard.

  reply	other threads:[~2008-02-05 18:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-11-12 14:30 [patch 0/3] page table changes schwidefsky
2007-11-12 14:30 ` [patch 1/3] add mm argument to pte/pmd/pud/pgd_free schwidefsky
2007-11-12 14:30 ` [patch 2/3] CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables schwidefsky
2008-01-02 20:44   ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-01-02 21:24     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2008-01-02 21:28       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-01-03 13:12     ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-03 14:01       ` Boaz Harrosh
2008-02-01 23:15   ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-03  5:37     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2008-02-03  5:53       ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-03  6:46         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-04 10:36         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2008-02-04 10:51           ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-04 11:02             ` Russell King
2008-02-04 11:14               ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-05 14:39             ` Martin Schwidefsky
2008-02-05 18:46               ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-02-06  9:06                 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2008-02-06  9:09                   ` Andrew Morton
2008-02-06  9:15                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-02-06 15:50                     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-11-12 14:30 ` [patch 3/3] arch_rebalance_pgtables call schwidefsky
2007-11-13 12:33   ` Nick Piggin
2007-11-14  9:26     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-11-14 10:06       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-11-14 11:49         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-11-14 22:07           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-11-15 17:13             ` Martin Schwidefsky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080205104625.60fa86b0.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --subject='Re: [patch 2/3] CONFIG_HIGHPTE vs. sub-page page tables.' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).