On Tue, 31 Jul 2012, Cyril Chemparathy wrote:
> This patch adds support for 64-bit physical addresses in virt_to_phys
> patching. This does not do real 64-bit add/sub, but instead patches in the
> upper 32-bits of the phys_offset directly into the output of virt_to_phys.
You should explain _why_ you do not a real aadd/sub. I did deduce it
but that might not be obvious to everyone. Also this subtlety should be
commented in the code as well.
> In addition to adding 64-bit support, this patch also adds a set_phys_offset()
> helper that is needed on architectures that need to modify PHYS_OFFSET during
> initialization.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cyril Chemparathy <cy...@ti.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
> arch/arm/kernel/head.S | 6 ++++++
> arch/arm/kernel/setup.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h
> index 4a0108f..110495c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/memory.h
> @@ -153,23 +153,31 @@
> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_PATCH_PHYS_VIRT
>
> extern unsigned long __pv_phys_offset;
> -#define PHYS_OFFSET __pv_phys_offset
> -
> +extern unsigned long __pv_phys_offset_high;
As mentioned previously, this is just too ugly. Please make
__pv_phys_offset into a phys_addr_t instead and mask the low/high parts
as needed in __virt_to_phys().
> extern unsigned long __pv_offset;
>
> +extern void set_phys_offset(phys_addr_t po);
> +
> +#define PHYS_OFFSET __virt_to_phys(PAGE_OFFSET)
> +
> static inline phys_addr_t __virt_to_phys(unsigned long x)
> {
> - unsigned long t;
> - early_patch_imm8(x, t, "add", __pv_offset);
> - return t;
> + unsigned long tlo, thi = 0;
> +
> + early_patch_imm8(x, tlo, "add", __pv_offset);
> + if (sizeof(phys_addr_t) > 4)
> + early_patch_imm8(0, thi, "add", __pv_phys_offset_high);
Given the high part is always the same, isn't there a better way than an
add with 0 that could be done here? The add will force a load of 0 in a
register needlessly just to add a constant value to it. Your new
patching framework ought to be able to patch a mov (or a mvn)
instruction directly.
Nicolas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
