[PATCH 3/5] ARM: pgtable: introduce pteval_t to represent a pte value

[catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)]

On 17 November 2010 17:29, Russell King - ARM Linux
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable.h
> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> ?#ifndef _ASMARM_PGTABLE_H
> ?#define _ASMARM_PGTABLE_H
>
> +#include <linux/const.h>
> ?#include <asm-generic/4level-fixup.h>
> ?#include <asm/proc-fns.h>
>
> @@ -165,30 +166,30 @@ extern void __pgd_error(const char *file, int line, pgd_t);
> ?* The PTE table pointer refers to the hardware entries; the "Linux"
> ?* entries are stored 1024 bytes below.
> ?*/
> -#define L_PTE_PRESENT ? ? ? ? ?(1 << 0)
> -#define L_PTE_YOUNG ? ? ? ? ? ?(1 << 1)
> -#define L_PTE_FILE ? ? ? ? ? ? (1 << 2) ? ? ? ?/* only when !PRESENT */
> -#define L_PTE_DIRTY ? ? ? ? ? ?(1 << 6)
> -#define L_PTE_WRITE ? ? ? ? ? ?(1 << 7)
> -#define L_PTE_USER ? ? ? ? ? ? (1 << 8)
> -#define L_PTE_EXEC ? ? ? ? ? ? (1 << 9)
> -#define L_PTE_SHARED ? ? ? ? ? (1 << 10) ? ? ? /* shared(v6), coherent(xsc3) */
> +#define L_PTE_PRESENT ? ? ? ? ?(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 0)
> +#define L_PTE_YOUNG ? ? ? ? ? ?(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 1)
> +#define L_PTE_FILE ? ? ? ? ? ? (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 2) /* only when !PRESENT */
> +#define L_PTE_DIRTY ? ? ? ? ? ?(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 6)
> +#define L_PTE_WRITE ? ? ? ? ? ?(_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 7)
> +#define L_PTE_USER ? ? ? ? ? ? (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 8)
> +#define L_PTE_EXEC ? ? ? ? ? ? (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 9)
> +#define L_PTE_SHARED ? ? ? ? ? (_AT(pteval_t, 1) << 10) ? ? ? ?/* shared(v6), coherent(xsc3) */

One of my patches which adds pmdval_t etc. also defines the PMD_SECT_*
macros with _AT(pmdval_t...). For consistency in the same file, I
defined the PTE_* as _AT(pteval_t), though the latter are only used in
.S files. Note that 64-bit values aren't handled by .S anyway.

Should your patch use _AT() for PTE_* macros as well or we just leave
them as they are?

-- 
Catalin