Akio Takebe wrote: > Hi, Xiantao > >> +void thash_vhpt_insert(VCPU *v, u64 pte, u64 itir, u64 va, int >> type) +{ + u64 phy_pte, psr; >> + ia64_rr mrr; >> + >> + mrr.val = ia64_get_rr(va); >> + phy_pte = translate_phy_pte(&pte, itir, va); >> + >> + if (itir_ps(itir) >= mrr.ps) { >> + vhpt_insert(phy_pte, itir, va, pte); >> + } else { >> + phy_pte &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_RV_MASK; >> + psr = ia64_clear_ic(); >> + ia64_itc(type, va, phy_pte, itir_ps(itir)); >> + ia64_set_psr(psr); >> + ia64_srlz_i(); >> + } >> +} > You add ia64_srlz_i() into ia64_set_psr() with [02]patch. > So is this a redundancy if the patch is applied? Yes, we need to remove it. Once the second patch is picked up. Thanks Xiantao - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
![]() |