On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 11:09:23AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 03/05/2018 08:26 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > + * It includes full range of PFN bits regardless if they were claimed for KeyID > > + * or not: we want to preserve KeyID on pte_modify() and pgprot_modify(). > > */ > > -#define _PAGE_CHG_MASK (PTE_PFN_MASK | _PAGE_PCD | _PAGE_PWT | \ > > +#define PTE_PFN_MASK_MAX \ > > + (((signed long)PAGE_MASK) & ((1UL << __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT) - 1)) > > +#define _PAGE_CHG_MASK (PTE_PFN_MASK_MAX | _PAGE_PCD | _PAGE_PWT | \ > > _PAGE_SPECIAL | _PAGE_ACCESSED | _PAGE_DIRTY | \ > > _PAGE_SOFT_DIRTY) > > Is there a way to make this: > > #define _PAGE_CHG_MASK (PTE_PFN_MASK | PTE_KEY_MASK...? | _PAGE_PCD | > > That would be a lot more understandable. Yes, it would. But it means we will have *two* variables referenced from _PAGE_CHG_MASK: one for PTE_PFN_MASK and one for PTE_KEY_MASK as both of them are dynamic. With this patch we would get rid of both of them. I'll update the description. -- Kirill A. Shutemov -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
