From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To: Chaitanya S Prakash <chaitanyas.prakash@arm.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] selftests/mm: Implement support for arm64 on va
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:14:36 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230323111436.mj2kbesfxfmvj5by@box.shutemov.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230323105243.2807166-1-chaitanyas.prakash@arm.com>
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 04:22:38PM +0530, Chaitanya S Prakash wrote:
> The va_128TBswitch selftest is designed and implemented for PowerPC and
> x86 architectures which support a 128TB switch, up to 256TB of virtual
> address space and hugepage sizes of 16MB and 2MB respectively. Arm64
> platforms on the other hand support a 256Tb switch, up to 4PB of virtual
> address space and a default hugepage size of 512MB when 64k pagesize is
> enabled.
>
> These architectural differences require introducing support for arm64
> platforms, after which a more generic naming convention is suggested.
> The in code comments are amended to provide a more platform independent
> explanation of the working of the code and nr_hugepages are configured
> as required. Finally, the file running the testcase is modified in order
> to prevent skipping of hugetlb testcases of va_high_addr_switch.
>
> This series has been tested on 6.3.0-rc3 kernel, both on arm64 and x86
> platforms.
>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
> Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
> Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
> Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>
> Chaitanya S Prakash (5):
> selftests/mm: Add support for arm64 platform on va switch
> selftests/mm: Rename va_128TBswitch to va_high_addr_switch
> selftests/mm: Add platform independent in code comments
> selftests/mm: Configure nr_hugepages for arm64
> selftests/mm: Run hugetlb testcases of va switch
>
> tools/testing/selftests/mm/Makefile | 4 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/mm/run_vmtests.sh | 12 +++++-
> ...va_128TBswitch.c => va_high_addr_switch.c} | 41 +++++++++++++++----
> ..._128TBswitch.sh => va_high_addr_switch.sh} | 6 ++-
> 4 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> rename tools/testing/selftests/mm/{va_128TBswitch.c => va_high_addr_switch.c} (86%)
> rename tools/testing/selftests/mm/{va_128TBswitch.sh => va_high_addr_switch.sh} (89%)
The patchset looks sane to me, but I have question: why arm64 has switch
on 256TB. The reason we have the switch is to keep system backward
compatible.
Maybe it is better to make arm64 switch also on 128TB to make it
compatible across architectures?
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-23 11:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-23 10:52 Chaitanya S Prakash
2023-03-23 10:52 ` [PATCH 1/5] selftests/mm: Add support for arm64 platform on va switch Chaitanya S Prakash
2023-03-23 10:52 ` [PATCH 2/5] selftests/mm: Rename va_128TBswitch to va_high_addr_switch Chaitanya S Prakash
2023-03-23 10:52 ` [PATCH 3/5] selftests/mm: Add platform independent in code comments Chaitanya S Prakash
2023-03-23 10:52 ` [PATCH 4/5] selftests/mm: Configure nr_hugepages for arm64 Chaitanya S Prakash
2023-03-23 10:52 ` [PATCH 5/5] selftests/mm: Run hugetlb testcases of va switch Chaitanya S Prakash
2023-03-23 11:14 ` Kirill A. Shutemov [this message]
2023-03-23 11:59 ` [PATCH 0/5] selftests/mm: Implement support for arm64 on va Mark Rutland
2023-03-23 21:49 ` Andrew Morton
2023-03-24 10:15 ` Anshuman Khandual
2023-04-05 4:22 ` Chaitanya S Prakash
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230323111436.mj2kbesfxfmvj5by@box.shutemov.name \
--to=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=chaitanyas.prakash@arm.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox