From: rabin@rab.in (Rabin Vincent)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: flush_dcache_page() in ARM vs ARM64
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:27:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161102132714.GA1326@lnxartpec.se.axis.com> (raw)
ARMv7-A and ARMv8-A are, as far as I can see, identical in which cache
behaviours they support. The data cache has to behave as PIPT while for
the instruction cache, PIPT, VIPT, and ASIC-tagged VIVT behaviours are
supported. See section B3.11 of the ARMv7-A ARM and section D4.9 of the
ARMv8-A ARM.
Both ARMv7-A with Multiprocessing Extensions and ARMv8-A broadcast cache
maintenance operations to other cores. See B2.2.5 of the ARMv7-A ARM
and D7.2.57 of the ARMv8-A ARM.
Both arch/arm/ (for ARMv6+) and arch/arm64/ define PG_arch_1 to be
PG_dcache_clean and use it to postpone flushing from flush_dcache_page()
to set_pte_at(). See arch/{arm,arm64}/mm/flush.c.
However, arch/arm64/'s flush_dcache_page() is implemented like this:
void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page)
{
if (test_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags))
clear_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
}
while arch/arm/ has this:
void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page)
{
struct address_space *mapping;
/*
* The zero page is never written to, so never has any dirty
* cache lines, and therefore never needs to be flushed.
*/
if (page == ZERO_PAGE(0))
return;
mapping = page_mapping(page);
if (!cache_ops_need_broadcast() &&
mapping && !page_mapcount(page))
clear_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
else {
__flush_dcache_page(mapping, page);
if (mapping && cache_is_vivt())
__flush_dcache_aliases(mapping, page);
else if (mapping)
__flush_icache_all();
set_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
}
}
Why does arch/arm/ flush the data cache area in flush_dcache_page() for
the (!mapping || page_mapcount(page)) case even on ARMv7+ME, while
arch/arm64/ doesn't for ARMv8?
Why does arch/arm/ invalidate the instruction cache in
flush_dcache_page() for the (mapping && page_count(page)) case even for
ARMv7+ME, while arch/arm64/ doesn't for ARMv8?
What would break with the following patch?
diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/flush.c b/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
index 3cced84..f1e6190 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
@@ -327,6 +327,12 @@ void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page)
if (page == ZERO_PAGE(0))
return;
+ if (!cache_ops_need_broadcast() && cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing()) {
+ if (test_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags))
+ clear_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
+ return;
+ }
+
mapping = page_mapping(page);
if (!cache_ops_need_broadcast() &&
next reply other threads:[~2016-11-02 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-02 13:27 Rabin Vincent [this message]
2016-11-02 16:40 ` flush_dcache_page() in ARM vs ARM64 Catalin Marinas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20161102132714.GA1326@lnxartpec.se.axis.com \
--to=rabin@rab.in \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.