From: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org,
oliver.upton@linux.dev, ardb@kernel.org, frederic@kernel.org,
james.morse@arm.com, joey.gouly@arm.com,
scott@os.amperecomputing.com, maz@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/7] arm64/futex: add futex atomic operation with FEAT_LSUI
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2025 09:34:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aH9NFffW6L2TpDVW@e129823.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aH4egvxnbQPu1XzE@J2N7QTR9R3>
Hi Mark,
> > Current futex atomic operations are implemented with ll/sc instructions and
> > clearing PSTATE.PAN.
> >
> > Since Armv9.6, FEAT_LSUI supplies not only load/store instructions but
> > also atomic operation for user memory access in kernel it doesn't need
> > to clear PSTATE.PAN bit anymore.
> >
> > With theses instructions some of futex atomic operations don't need to
> > be implmented with ldxr/stlxr pair instead can be implmented with
> > one atomic operation supplied by FEAT_LSUI.
> >
> > However, some of futex atomic operations still need to use ll/sc way
> > via ldtxr/stltxr supplied by FEAT_LSUI since there is no correspondant
> > atomic instruction or doesn't support word size operation
> > (i.e) eor, cas{mb}t But It's good to work without clearing PSTATE.PAN bit.
>
> That's unfortunate; have we fed back to Arm's architecture folks that we
> care about those cases?
I haven’t done so yet. If you don’t mind,
could you let me know the appropriate person to give the feedback to?
>
> > Signed-off-by: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@arm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/futex_lsui.h | 132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/futex_lsui.h
>
> This logic is introduced unused, and TBH I don't think this needs to be
> in a separate header.
>
> I reckon it's be better to keep all of this in <asm/futex.h> and rework
> the series to:
>
> (1) Factor out the existing LL/SC logic into separate LL/SC helpers in
> <asm/futex.h>, with an __llsc_ prefix, called by the existing
> functions.
>
> (2) Add the new __lsui_ futex operations to <asm/futex.h>, along with
> code to select between the __llsc_ and __lsui_ versions.
>
> We split the regular atomics different becuase there are *many* generic
> atomic operations, but I don't think it's worthwhile to split the futex
> logic over several headers.
>
> Maybe it's worth having <asm/lsui.h>, but for now I reckon it's best to
> also fold that into <asm/futex.h>, and we can split it out later if we
> need it for something else.
Thanks for your suggestion.
I’ll rework it while keeping this implementation.
Thanks!
--
Sincerely,
Yeoreum Yun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-22 8:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-21 8:36 [PATCH v4 0/7] support FEAT_LSUI and apply it on futex atomic ops Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] arm64: cpufeature: add FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] KVM/arm64: expose FEAT_LSUI to guest Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] arm64/Kconfig: add LSUI Kconfig Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 10:52 ` Mark Rutland
2025-07-22 8:17 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] arm64/futex: move futex atomic logic with clearing PAN bit Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 10:56 ` Mark Rutland
2025-07-22 8:21 ` Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] arm64/futex: add futex atomic operation with FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 11:03 ` Mark Rutland
2025-07-22 8:34 ` Yeoreum Yun [this message]
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] arm64/asm: introduce lsui.h Yeoreum Yun
2025-07-21 8:36 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] arm64/futex: support futex with FEAT_LSUI Yeoreum Yun
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=aH9NFffW6L2TpDVW@e129823.arm.com \
--to=yeoreum.yun@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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.