On Fri, Aug 06 2021, David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 06.08.21 09:11, Thomas Huth wrote: >> On 06/08/2021 08.52, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>> >>>> According to the PoP: >>>> >>>> "When the enhanced-DAT facility 1 is not installed, or >>>> when the facility is installed but the multiple-block >>>> control is zero, general register R 2 contains a real >>>> address. When the enhanced-DAT facility 1 is >>>> installed and the multiple-block control is one, gen- >>>> eral register R 2 contains an absolute address." >>>> >>>> Don't we have to take that into consideration here, too? >>> >>> We don't support EDAT1 a.k.a. huge pages yet. If we ever do, we have to >>> further extend this code. >> >> Ok, then maybe add a comment or assert() to make sure that we don't forget? > > Well, we'll need modifications and extensions all over the place to > support EDAT1, so I'm not sure this will really help ... we'll have to > carefully scan the PoP either way.
Something like /* always real address, as long as we don't implement EDAT1 */ would still be useful, I think.
