Re: [PATCH RFC 01/11] mm: introduce hw_pte_t for PTE table storage
Anshuman Khandual <[email protected]> Fri, 31 Jul 2026 12:29:40 +0530
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,dev.linux.lists.damon,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-parisc,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.xenproject.lists.xen-devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <dzpt4ays25vvoyt56oy4iatfbqwp7z4gdsxumirv3v2nbvhoy4@73upph7f2hbk> |
On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 08:53:46AM +0200, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 31.07.26 07:49, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 05:46:52PM +0100, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: > > > pte_t is used both for logical PTE values and for entries stored in a PTE > > > table, so pte_t * does not distinguish a pointer to a copied value from a > > > pointer to table storage. > > > > Should we rather call them as "Linux PTE" and "HW PTE" instead ? > > What about "SW PTE"? Both Linux PTE or SW PTE would be better than current Logical PTE description.