From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D3F1C4321D for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 10:37:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19C4521532 for ; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 10:37:18 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 19C4521532 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.crashing.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728637AbeHWOGV (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 10:06:21 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:38860 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726145AbeHWOGU (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Aug 2018 10:06:20 -0400 Received: from gate.crashing.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id w7NAaSHq021869; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 05:36:29 -0500 Received: (from segher@localhost) by gate.crashing.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id w7NAaQt2021867; Thu, 23 Aug 2018 05:36:26 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: gate.crashing.org: segher set sender to segher@kernel.crashing.org using -f Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 05:36:26 -0500 From: Segher Boessenkool To: Christophe LEROY Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] powerpc/mm: fix a warning when a cache is common to PGD and hugepages Message-ID: <20180823103625.GR24439@gate.crashing.org> References: <2f96bf1a8df1091c642de099ed07c34b5ab9b90a.1534258290.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <4aaca2d27429e6bdadc340fd3b96e7c350c4b2f4.1534258290.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <6dea8d0c-c4ab-49aa-da26-a729c18fa818@linux.ibm.com> <006e5f33-b816-7508-faac-da26a860659c@c-s.fr> <3e6412ac-c645-908f-a3bb-c9a2a72f4b68@linux.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 11:40:22AM +0200, Christophe LEROY wrote: > The only small problème I have is that some version of GCC seems to > complain about big memset() (132k and 256k ones). Is there a way to tell > GCC we really want to do it ? I'm not sure what you mean. Complain, is that a warning, is that an error? What does it say? Do you have some example code to reproduce it? Etc. Very many things use tiny memsets like that, so you must mean something more specialised. Segher