Re: [PATCH 1/9] mm: introduce hw_pte_t for PTE table storage

Anshuman Khandual <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-parisc,dev.linux.lists.damon,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,org.kernel.vger.linux-fsdevel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users,org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.xenproject.lists.xen-devel
Message-ID <u457qwrnkaquvqfn4op2a4wcdflm6d4gzut5ii4ialbeqjiyfj@qpn5fu5kwn4z>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 01:20:00PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 8/10/26 12:09, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> > On 09/08/2026 6:45 pm, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> >> On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 04:24:00PM +0100, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
> >>> Thank you for testing it out on s390.
> >>>
> >>> As __hw_pte_t isn't being used yet in this series, would s390 enablement
> >>> patches add __hw_pte_t to this definition?
> >>
> >> I hope there is a better solution. As I noted m68k, powerpc and sparc
> >> may also be affected, so I would suggest to look into those as well.
> >> I would prefer s390 to use the generic one rather than circumvent a
> >> compile error in a custom way.
> > I've just checked all of these architectures by doing dirty conversion and
> > reached to same conclusion that __hw_pte_t must be defined like:
> >  
> > typedef struct __hw_pte_t { pte_t __pte; } hw_pte_t;
> > 
> > I'lll add __hw_pte_t to this series. (Initially on last email I'd thought
> > that the first user would add __hw_pte_t. But it seems sensible to add it
> > now)
> 
> Yes, do it as part of the introduction. Also a good idea to mention in the patch
> description *why* that is required.

Agreed.

> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> David
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.