On Sat, Nov 19, 2016 at 08:57:28AM +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2016-11-18 at 20:11 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > > > + * Work out how many sets the TLB has, for the use of > > > + * the TLB invalidation loop in book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S. > > > + */ > > > + if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_300)) > > > + kvm->arch.tlb_sets = 256; /* POWER9 */ > > > + else if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_ARCH_207S)) > > > + kvm->arch.tlb_sets = 512; /* POWER8 */ > > > + else > > > + kvm->arch.tlb_sets = 128; /* POWER7 */ > > > + > > > > We have > > > > #define POWER7_TLB_SETS 128 /* # sets in POWER7 TLB */ > > #define POWER8_TLB_SETS 512 /* # sets in POWER8 TLB */ > > #define POWER9_TLB_SETS_HASH 256 /* # sets in POWER9 TLB Hash mode */ > > #define POWER9_TLB_SETS_RADIX 128 /* # sets in POWER9 TLB Radix mode */ > > > > May be use that instead of opencoding ? > > Both are bad and are going to kill us for future backward > compatibility. > > These should be a device-tree property. We can fallback to hard wired > values if it doesn't exist but we should at least look for one. Tell me what the property is called and I'll add code to use it. :) That's the whole reason why I moved this to C code. > Note: P8 firmwares all have a bug creating a bogus "tlb-sets" property > in the CPU node, so let's create a new one instead, with 2 entries > (hash vs. radix) or 2 new ones, one for hash and one for radix (when > available). Paul. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
