Displaying 20 results from an estimated 26 matches for "pte_young".
Did you mean:
pte_mkyoung
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 4/9] 00mm5 combine flush accessed dirty.patch
...ng addr, pte_t *ptep)
-{
- if (!pte_dirty(*ptep))
- return 0;
- return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &ptep->pte_low);
-}
-
#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_TEST_AND_CLEAR_YOUNG
-static inline int ptep_test_and_clear_young(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
-{
- if (!pte_young(*ptep))
- return 0;
- return test_and_clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &ptep->pte_low);
-}
+
+#define __HAVE_ARCH_PTEP_CLEAR_DIRTY_FLUSH
+#define ptep_clear_flush_dirty(vma, address, ptep) \
+({ \
+ int __dirty; \
+ __dirty = pte_dirty(*(ptep)); \
+ if (__dirty) { \
+...
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 4/5] Fix bad mmu names.patch
...\
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__dirty; \
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ do { \
__young = pte_young(*(ptep)); \
if (__young) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__young; \
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 4/5] Fix bad mmu names.patch
...\
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__dirty; \
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ do { \
__young = pte_young(*(ptep)); \
if (__young) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
- pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (address), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__young; \
2007 Apr 18
0
[PATCH 9/9] 00mme update pte hook.patch
...\
__dirty = pte_dirty(*(ptep)); \
if (__dirty) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_DIRTY, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__dirty; \
@@ -299,6 +318,7 @@ do { \
__young = pte_young(*(ptep)); \
if (__young) { \
clear_bit(_PAGE_BIT_ACCESSED, &(ptep)->pte_low); \
+ pte_update_defer((vma)->vm_mm, (addr), (ptep)); \
flush_tlb_page(vma, address); \
} \
__young; \
@@ -321,6 +341,7 @@ static inline void ptep_set_wrprotect(st
static i...
2007 Oct 31
5
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Real pvops work part
Hey folks,
This is the part-of-pvops-implementation-that-is-not-exactly-a-merge. Neat,
uh? This is the majority of the work.
The first patch in the series does not really belong here. It was already
sent to lkml separetedly before, but I'm including it again, for a very
simple reason: Try to test the paravirt patches without it, and you'll fail
miserably ;-) (and it was not yet
2007 Oct 31
5
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Real pvops work part
Hey folks,
This is the part-of-pvops-implementation-that-is-not-exactly-a-merge. Neat,
uh? This is the majority of the work.
The first patch in the series does not really belong here. It was already
sent to lkml separetedly before, but I'm including it again, for a very
simple reason: Try to test the paravirt patches without it, and you'll fail
miserably ;-) (and it was not yet
2008 May 23
0
[PATCH] x86/paravirt: add pte_flags to just get pte flags
...=========================================================
--- a/include/asm-x86/pgtable.h
+++ b/include/asm-x86/pgtable.h
@@ -163,37 +163,37 @@
*/
static inline int pte_dirty(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte) & _PAGE_DIRTY;
+ return pte_flags(pte) & _PAGE_DIRTY;
}
static inline int pte_young(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte) & _PAGE_ACCESSED;
+ return pte_flags(pte) & _PAGE_ACCESSED;
}
static inline int pte_write(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte) & _PAGE_RW;
+ return pte_flags(pte) & _PAGE_RW;
}
static inline int pte_file(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte)...
2008 May 23
0
[PATCH] x86/paravirt: add pte_flags to just get pte flags
...=========================================================
--- a/include/asm-x86/pgtable.h
+++ b/include/asm-x86/pgtable.h
@@ -163,37 +163,37 @@
*/
static inline int pte_dirty(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte) & _PAGE_DIRTY;
+ return pte_flags(pte) & _PAGE_DIRTY;
}
static inline int pte_young(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte) & _PAGE_ACCESSED;
+ return pte_flags(pte) & _PAGE_ACCESSED;
}
static inline int pte_write(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte) & _PAGE_RW;
+ return pte_flags(pte) & _PAGE_RW;
}
static inline int pte_file(pte_t pte)
{
- return pte_val(pte)...
2008 Mar 20
0
[RFC/PATCH 02/15] preparation: host memory management changes for s390 kvm
...p, _PAGE_RCP_GC);
+ if (skey & _PAGE_REFERENCED)
+ rcp_set_bits(ptep, _PAGE_RCP_GR);
+ if (rcp_test_and_clear_bits(ptep, _PAGE_RCP_HC))
+ SetPageDirty(page);
+ if (rcp_test_and_clear_bits(ptep, _PAGE_RCP_HR))
+ SetPageReferenced(page);
+#endif
+}
+
/*
* query functions pte_write/pte_dirty/pte_young only work if
* pte_present() is true. Undefined behaviour if not..
@@ -599,6 +668,8 @@ static inline void pmd_clear(pmd_t *pmd)
static inline void pte_clear(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep)
{
+ if (mm->context.pgstes)
+ ptep_rcp_copy(ptep);
pte_val(*ptep) = _PAGE_T...
2007 Aug 10
9
[PATCH 0/25 -v2] paravirt_ops for x86_64, second round
Here is an slightly updated version of the paravirt_ops patch.
If your comments and criticism were welcome before, now it's even more!
There are some issues that are _not_ addressed in this revision, and here
are the causes:
* split debugreg into multiple functions, suggested by Andi:
- Me and jsfg agree that introducing more pvops (specially 14!) is
not worthwhile. So, although we do
2007 Aug 10
9
[PATCH 0/25 -v2] paravirt_ops for x86_64, second round
Here is an slightly updated version of the paravirt_ops patch.
If your comments and criticism were welcome before, now it's even more!
There are some issues that are _not_ addressed in this revision, and here
are the causes:
* split debugreg into multiple functions, suggested by Andi:
- Me and jsfg agree that introducing more pvops (specially 14!) is
not worthwhile. So, although we do
2007 Nov 09
11
[PATCH 0/24] paravirt_ops for unified x86 - that's me again!
Hey folks,
Here's a new spin of the pvops64 patch series.
We didn't get that many comments from the last time,
so it should be probably almost ready to get in. Heya!
>From the last version, the most notable changes are:
* consolidation of system.h, merging jeremy's comments about ordering
concerns
* consolidation of smp functions that goes through smp_ops. They're sharing
2007 Nov 09
11
[PATCH 0/24] paravirt_ops for unified x86 - that's me again!
Hey folks,
Here's a new spin of the pvops64 patch series.
We didn't get that many comments from the last time,
so it should be probably almost ready to get in. Heya!
>From the last version, the most notable changes are:
* consolidation of system.h, merging jeremy's comments about ordering
concerns
* consolidation of smp functions that goes through smp_ops. They're sharing
2007 Aug 15
13
[PATCH 0/25][V3] pvops_64 last round (hopefully)
This is hopefully the last iteration of the pvops64 patch.
>From the last version, we have only one change, which is include/asm-x86_64/processor.h: There were still one survivor in raw asm.
Also, git screwed me up for some reason, and the 25th patch was missing the new files, paravirt.{c,h}. (although I do remember having git-add'ed it, but who knows...)
Andrew, could you please push it
2007 Aug 15
13
[PATCH 0/25][V3] pvops_64 last round (hopefully)
This is hopefully the last iteration of the pvops64 patch.
>From the last version, we have only one change, which is include/asm-x86_64/processor.h: There were still one survivor in raw asm.
Also, git screwed me up for some reason, and the 25th patch was missing the new files, paravirt.{c,h}. (although I do remember having git-add'ed it, but who knows...)
Andrew, could you please push it
2007 Apr 18
3
[PATCH] abstract out bits of ldt.c
Chris Wright wrote:
>* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote:
>
>
>>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this
>>
>>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>
>>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other
>>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself
>>must have live segments
2007 Apr 18
3
[PATCH] abstract out bits of ldt.c
Chris Wright wrote:
>* Zachary Amsden (zach@vmware.com) wrote:
>
>
>>Does Xen assume page aligned descriptor tables? I assume from this
>>
>>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>
>>patch and snippets I have gathered from others, that is a yes, and other
>>things here imply that DT pages are not shadowed. If so, Xen itself
>>must have live segments
2020 Apr 13
2
Build regressions/improvements in v5.7-rc1
...ook3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_write': => 416:19
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_wrprotect': => 623:21
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_young': => 485:19
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'ptep_get_and_clear': => 451:21
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'ptep_get_and_clear_full': => 459:21
> +...
2020 Apr 13
2
Build regressions/improvements in v5.7-rc1
...ook3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_write': => 416:19
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_wrprotect': => 623:21
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_young': => 485:19
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'ptep_get_and_clear': => 451:21
> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'ptep_get_and_clear_full': => 459:21
> +...
2020 Apr 14
0
Build regressions/improvements in v5.7-rc1
.../pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_write': => 416:19
>> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_wrprotect': => 623:21
>> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'pte_young': => 485:19
>> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'ptep_get_and_clear': => 451:21
>> + /kisskb/src/arch/powerpc/include/asm/book3s/64/pgtable.h: error: redefinition of 'ptep_get_and_clear_full': => 459:21...