Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 13 Jan 2018 20:31:40 -0800
From:      Nathan Whitehorn <nwhitehorn@freebsd.org>
To:        Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Cc:        src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r327950 - in head/sys/powerpc: aim include powerpc ps3
Message-ID:  <f33e9b1a-28bd-e6cf-4bdb-ec0097c0787d@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <010d0153-8931-a3c2-db21-dfcbaf848fc0@freebsd.org>
References:  <201801132314.w0DNEra5002692@repo.freebsd.org> <20180113232441.GV1684@kib.kiev.ua> <010d0153-8931-a3c2-db21-dfcbaf848fc0@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On 01/13/18 15:28, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>
>
> On 01/13/18 15:24, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 11:14:53PM +0000, Nathan Whitehorn wrote:
>>> +/*
>>> + * We (usually) have a direct map of all physical memory. All
>>> + * uses of this macro must be gated by a check on hw_direct_map!
>>> + * The location of the direct map may not be 1:1 in future, so use
>>> + * of the macro is recommended; it may also grow an assert that 
>>> hw_direct_map
>>> + * is set.
>>> + */
>>> +#define PHYS_TO_DMAP(x) x
>>> +#define DMAP_TO_PHYS(x) x
>> Take a look at the sys/vm/vm_page.c:vm_page_free_prep() function.
>>
>
> I think the checks in there should work as designed, unless I'm 
> missing something. Am I?
> -Nathan
>

Actually, wait, this is broken if hw_direct_map is not set. I can do an 
#ifdef __powerpc__ hack, but do you have opinions for a better MI flag 
for "yes, the macro is defined but, no, the direct map may not be 
available"?
-Nathan



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f33e9b1a-28bd-e6cf-4bdb-ec0097c0787d>