[PATCH v4 4/7] arm64: Add a description on 48-bit address space with 4KB pages

[Catalin Marinas]

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 07:41:40AM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:48 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 05:59:27AM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> > > --- a/Documentation/arm64/memory.txt
> > > +++ b/Documentation/arm64/memory.txt
> > > @@ -8,10 +8,11 @@ This document describes the virtual memory layout
> > > used by the AArch64  Linux kernel. The architecture allows up to 4
> > > levels of translation  tables with a 4KB page size and up to 3 levels with a 64KB page size.
> > >
> > > -AArch64 Linux uses 3 levels of translation tables with the 4KB page
> > > -configuration, allowing 39-bit (512GB) virtual addresses for both
> > > user -and kernel. With 64KB pages, only 2 levels of translation tables
> > > are -used but the memory layout is the same.
> > > +AArch64 Linux uses 3 levels and 4 levels of translation tables with
> > > +the 4KB page configuration, allowing 39-bit (512GB) and 48-bit
> > > +(256TB) virtual addresses, respectively, for both user and kernel.
> > > +With 64KB pages, only 2 levels of translation tables are used but the
> > > +memory layout is the same.
> > 
> > Any reason why we couldn't use 48-bit address space with 64K pages (implying 3 levels)?
> 
> No technical reason.
> Since 64K+3levels is not implemented in this set, I didn't add it.
> 
> Should 64K+3levels be prepared in this patchset?
> 
> > > -AArch64 Linux memory layout with 64KB pages:
> > > +AArch64 Linux memory layout with 4KB pages + 4 levels:
> > > +
> > > +Start			End			Size		Use
> > > +-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > +0000000000000000	0000ffffffffffff	 256TB		user
> > > +
> > > +ffff000000000000	ffff7bfffffeffff	~124TB		vmalloc
> > 
> > BTW, maybe as a separate patch we should change the "end" to be exclusive. It becomes harder to modify
> > (I've been through this a few times already ;)) and even follow the changes.
> 
> Does "exclusive" mean that 0000ffffffffffff is changed to 0001000000000000?
> Or Does it mean that "End" column is dropped?

Not dropped but changed to 0001.... (the kernel already prints the
memory layout in a similar way).

-- 
Catalin