Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
David S. Miller
9df1dab1df [SPARC64]: Align address in huge_pte_alloc().
We are about to fill in all HPAGE_SIZE's worth
of PAGE_SIZE ptes, so we have to give the first
pte in that set else we scribble over random memory
when we fill in the ptes.

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2006-03-31 23:03:36 -08:00
Linus Torvalds
d04ef3a795 Merge master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/sparc-2.6
* master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/sparc-2.6:
  [SPARC64]: Add a secondary TSB for hugepage mappings.
  [SPARC]: Respect vm_page_prot in io_remap_page_range().
2006-03-22 10:56:57 -08:00
David Gibson
42b88befd6 [PATCH] hugepage: is_aligned_hugepage_range() cleanup
Quite a long time back, prepare_hugepage_range() replaced
is_aligned_hugepage_range() as the callback from mm/mmap.c to arch code to
verify if an address range is suitable for a hugepage mapping.
is_aligned_hugepage_range() stuck around, but only to implement
prepare_hugepage_range() on archs which didn't implement their own.

Most archs (everything except ia64 and powerpc) used the same
implementation of is_aligned_hugepage_range().  On powerpc, which
implements its own prepare_hugepage_range(), the custom version was never
used.

In addition, "is_aligned_hugepage_range()" was a bad name, because it
suggests it returns true iff the given range is a good hugepage range,
whereas in fact it returns 0-or-error (so the sense is reversed).

This patch cleans up by abolishing is_aligned_hugepage_range().  Instead
prepare_hugepage_range() is defined directly.  Most archs use the default
version, which simply checks the given region is aligned to the size of a
hugepage.  ia64 and powerpc define custom versions.  The ia64 one simply
checks that the range is in the correct address space region in addition to
being suitably aligned.  The powerpc version (just as previously) checks
for suitable addresses, and if necessary performs low-level MMU frobbing to
set up new areas for use by hugepages.

No libhugetlbfs testsuite regressions on ppc64 (POWER5 LPAR).

Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-03-22 07:54:04 -08:00
David S. Miller
dcc1e8dd88 [SPARC64]: Add a secondary TSB for hugepage mappings.
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2006-03-22 01:15:14 -08:00
David S. Miller
f6b83f070e [SPARC64]: Fix 2 bugs in huge page support.
1) huge_pte_offset() did not check the page table hierarchy
   elements as being empty correctly, resulting in an OOPS

2) Need platform specific hugetlb_get_unmapped_area() to handle
   the top-down vs. bottom-up address space allocation strategies.

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2006-03-20 01:17:17 -08:00
David Gibson
63551ae0fe [PATCH] Hugepage consolidation
A lot of the code in arch/*/mm/hugetlbpage.c is quite similar.  This patch
attempts to consolidate a lot of the code across the arch's, putting the
combined version in mm/hugetlb.c.  There are a couple of uglyish hacks in
order to covert all the hugepage archs, but the result is a very large
reduction in the total amount of code.  It also means things like hugepage
lazy allocation could be implemented in one place, instead of six.

Tested, at least a little, on ppc64, i386 and x86_64.

Notes:
	- this patch changes the meaning of set_huge_pte() to be more
	  analagous to set_pte()
	- does SH4 need s special huge_ptep_get_and_clear()??

Acked-by: William Lee Irwin <wli@holomorphy.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-06-21 18:46:15 -07:00
Linus Torvalds
1da177e4c3 Linux-2.6.12-rc2
Initial git repository build. I'm not bothering with the full history,
even though we have it. We can create a separate "historical" git
archive of that later if we want to, and in the meantime it's about
3.2GB when imported into git - space that would just make the early
git days unnecessarily complicated, when we don't have a lot of good
infrastructure for it.

Let it rip!
2005-04-16 15:20:36 -07:00