1. 22 12月, 2010 4 次提交
  2. 27 11月, 2010 6 次提交
  3. 21 11月, 2010 1 次提交
  4. 27 10月, 2010 1 次提交
  5. 19 9月, 2010 2 次提交
  6. 17 5月, 2010 1 次提交
  7. 25 11月, 2009 1 次提交
  8. 18 8月, 2009 1 次提交
  9. 11 7月, 2009 2 次提交
  10. 05 7月, 2009 2 次提交
  11. 26 4月, 2009 1 次提交
  12. 01 10月, 2008 6 次提交
  13. 30 9月, 2008 1 次提交
  14. 07 8月, 2008 1 次提交
  15. 03 8月, 2008 1 次提交
  16. 28 4月, 2008 1 次提交
    • N
      mm: introduce pte_special pte bit · 7e675137
      Nick Piggin 提交于
      s390 for one, cannot implement VM_MIXEDMAP with pfn_valid, due to their memory
      model (which is more dynamic than most).  Instead, they had proposed to
      implement it with an additional path through vm_normal_page(), using a bit in
      the pte to determine whether or not the page should be refcounted:
      
      vm_normal_page()
      {
      	...
              if (unlikely(vma->vm_flags & (VM_PFNMAP|VM_MIXEDMAP))) {
                      if (vma->vm_flags & VM_MIXEDMAP) {
      #ifdef s390
      			if (!mixedmap_refcount_pte(pte))
      				return NULL;
      #else
                              if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
                                      return NULL;
      #endif
                              goto out;
                      }
      	...
      }
      
      This is fine, however if we are allowed to use a bit in the pte to determine
      refcountedness, we can use that to _completely_ replace all the vma based
      schemes.  So instead of adding more cases to the already complex vma-based
      scheme, we can have a clearly seperate and simple pte-based scheme (and get
      slightly better code generation in the process):
      
      vm_normal_page()
      {
      #ifdef s390
      	if (!mixedmap_refcount_pte(pte))
      		return NULL;
      	return pte_page(pte);
      #else
      	...
      #endif
      }
      
      And finally, we may rather make this concept usable by any architecture rather
      than making it s390 only, so implement a new type of pte state for this.
      Unfortunately the old vma based code must stay, because some architectures may
      not be able to spare pte bits.  This makes vm_normal_page a little bit more
      ugly than we would like, but the 2 cases are clearly seperate.
      
      So introduce a pte_special pte state, and use it in mm/memory.c.  It is
      currently a noop for all architectures, so this doesn't actually result in any
      compiled code changes to mm/memory.o.
      
      BTW:
      I haven't put vm_normal_page() into arch code as-per an earlier suggestion.
      The reason is that, regardless of where vm_normal_page is actually
      implemented, the *abstraction* is still exactly the same. Also, while it
      depends on whether the architecture has pte_special or not, that is the
      only two possible cases, and it really isn't an arch specific function --
      the role of the arch code should be to provide primitive functions and
      accessors with which to build the core code; pte_special does that. We do
      not want architectures to know or care about vm_normal_page itself, and
      we definitely don't want them being able to invent something new there
      out of sight of mm/ code. If we made vm_normal_page an arch function, then
      we have to make vm_insert_mixed (next patch) an arch function too. So I
      don't think moving it to arch code fundamentally improves any abstractions,
      while it does practically make the code more difficult to follow, for both
      mm and arch developers, and easier to misuse.
      
      [akpm@linux-foundation.org: build fix]
      Signed-off-by: NNick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
      Acked-by: NCarsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Jared Hulbert <jaredeh@gmail.com>
      Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
      Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      7e675137
  17. 08 11月, 2007 1 次提交
  18. 18 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  19. 17 7月, 2007 1 次提交
  20. 09 5月, 2007 1 次提交
  21. 12 2月, 2007 1 次提交
  22. 13 12月, 2006 1 次提交
    • R
      [ARM] Unuse another Linux PTE bit · ad1ae2fe
      Russell King 提交于
      L_PTE_ASID is not really required to be stored in every PTE, since we
      can identify it via the address passed to set_pte_at().  So, create
      set_pte_ext() which takes the address of the PTE to set, the Linux
      PTE value, and the additional CPU PTE bits which aren't encoded in
      the Linux PTE value.
      Signed-off-by: NRussell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
      ad1ae2fe
  23. 02 12月, 2006 1 次提交
  24. 27 9月, 2006 1 次提交