On Sun, Feb 04, 2024 at 07:39:38PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > Hi Mike, > > On 2024/2/4 18:58, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 04:05:40PM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > > > For kernel PTE page, we do not need to allocate and initialize its split > > > ptlock, but as a page table page, it's still necessary to add PG_table > > > flag and NR_PAGETABLE statistics for it. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > include/asm-generic/pgalloc.h | 7 ++++++- > > > include/linux/mm.h | 21 ++++++++++++++++----- > > > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > This should also update the architectures that define > > __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_ALLOC_ONE_KERNEL, otherwise NR_PAGETABLE counts will get > > wrong. > > Yes, this patchset only focuses on the generic implementation. For those > architectures that define __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_ALLOC_ONE_KERNEL, some reuse > the generic __pte_alloc_one_kernel(), but some have their own customized > implementations, which indeed need to be fixed. > > I wasn't familiar with those architectures and didn't investigate why > they couldn't reuse the generic __pte_alloc_one_kernel(), so I didn't > fix them. But with your patch NR_PAGETABLE will underflow e.g. on arm and it'd be a regression for no good reason. > It would be better if there are maintainers corresponding to > the architecture who can help fix it. After all, they have a better > understanding of the historical background and have a testing > environment. ;) -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
