From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xen: arm: update arm32 assembly
 primitives to Linux v3.16-rc6
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 17:20:56 +0100
Message-ID: <53D283E8.4000709@linaro.org>
References: <80a33cc325055bc9d63e4ef272c5b7f68f8fa812.1406301772.git.ian.campbell@citrix.com>	
	<2c06427f1180cf408a3e9750de3040dde0afe2ea.1406301772.git.ian.campbell@citrix.com>	
	<53D27AF3.5070706@linaro.org>	
	<1406303283.24842.41.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>	
	<53D27C6B.6070907@linaro.org>	
	<1406304202.24842.50.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
	<1406304831.24842.54.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1406304831.24842.54.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xen.org, tim@xen.org, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 07/25/2014 05:13 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 17:03 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
>> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:48 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
>>> On 07/25/2014 04:48 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 16:42 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>>> Hi Ian,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 07/25/2014 04:22 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>>>> bitops, cmpxchg, atomics: Import:
>>>>>>   c32ffce ARM: 7984/1: prefetch: add prefetchw invocations for barriered atomics
>>>>>
>>>>> Compare to Linux we don't have specific prefetch* helpers. We directly
>>>>> use the compiler builtin ones. Shouldn't we import the ARM specific
>>>>> helpers to gain in performance?
>>>>
>>>> My binaries are full of pld instructions where I think I would expect
>>>> them, so it seems like the compiler builtin ones are sufficient.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect the Linux define is there to cope with older compilers or
>>>> something.
>>>
>>> If so:
>>
>> The compiled output is very different if I use the arch specific
>> explicit variants. The explicit variant generates (lots) more pldw and
>> (somewhat) fewer pld. I've no idea what this means...
> 
> It's a bit more obvious for aarch64 where gcc 4.8 doesn't generate any
> prefetches at all via the builtins...
> 
> Here's what I've got in my tree. I've no idea if we should take some or
> all of it...

I don't think it will be harmful for ARMv7 to use specific prefetch*
helpers.

[..]

> +/*
> + * Prefetching support
> + */
> +#define ARCH_HAS_PREFETCH
> +static inline void prefetch(const void *ptr)
> +{
> +        asm volatile("prfm pldl1keep, %a0\n" : : "p" (ptr));
> +}
> +
> +#define ARCH_HAS_PREFETCHW
> +static inline void prefetchw(const void *ptr)
> +{
> +        asm volatile("prfm pstl1keep, %a0\n" : : "p" (ptr));
> +}
> +
> +#define ARCH_HAS_SPINLOCK_PREFETCH
> +static inline void spin_lock_prefetch(const void *x)
> +{
> +        prefetchw(x);
> +}

Looking to the code. spin_lock_prefetch is called in the tree. I'm not
sure we should keep this helper.

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall