On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 11:45 +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> I could add your comment and resubmit, but my experience from
> communication
> with audience of this patch tells me that silence means rather no
> acceptance.
I don't think adding a comment to explain tricky hidden details would
typi
On Mon, 2023-07-10 at 09:36 +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> The issue needs to be fixed by including _PAGE_PAT bit into a bitmask
> used
> by pgprot_modify() for selecting bits to be preserved. We can do
> that
> either internally to pgprot_modify() (as initially proposed), or by
> making
> _PA
On Wed, 2023-06-07 at 23:33 +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > So since _PAGE_PSE is actually the same value as _PAGE_PAT, you
> > don't
> > actually need to have _PAGE_PSE in _HPAGE_CHG_MASK in order to get
> > functional correctness. Is that right?
>
> As soon as we add _PAGE_PAT to _PAGE_CHG_
On Wed, 2023-06-07 at 19:11 +0200, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 June 2023 17:31:24 CEST Dave Hansen wrote:
> > On 6/7/23 08:23, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> > >
> > > Extend bitmask used by pgprot_modify() for selecting bits to be
> > > preserved
> > > with _PAGE_PAT bit. However, s
