Re: [PATCH v2 07/45] arm64: mpam: Context switch the MPAM registers

Ben Horgan
2026-01-06T11:14:57Z

Hi Jonathan,

On 1/5/26 17:04, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 18:11:09 +0000
> Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com> wrote:
>
>> From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
>>
>> MPAM allows traffic in the SoC to be labeled by the OS, these labels are
>> used to apply policy in caches and bandwidth regulators, and to monitor
>> traffic in the SoC. The label is made up of a PARTID and PMG value. The x86
>> equivalent calls these CLOSID and RMID, but they don't map precisely.
>>
>> MPAM has two CPU system registers that is used to hold the PARTID and PMG
>> values that traffic generated at each exception level will use. These can
>> be set per-task by the resctrl file system. (resctrl is the defacto
>> interface for controlling this stuff).
>>
>> Add a helper to switch this.
>>
>> struct task_struct's separate CLOSID and RMID fields are insufficient to
>> implement resctrl using MPAM, as resctrl can change the PARTID (CLOSID) and
>> PMG (sort of like the RMID) separately. On x86, the rmid is an independent
>> number, so a race that writes a mismatched closid and rmid into hardware is
>> benign. On arm64, the pmg bits extend the partid.
>> (i.e. partid-5 has a pmg-0 that is not the same as partid-6's pmg-0). In
>> this case, mismatching the values will 'dirty' a pmg value that resctrl
>> believes is clean, and is not tracking with its 'limbo' code.
>>
>> To avoid this, the partid and pmg are always read and written as a pair.
>> Instead of making struct task_struct's closid and rmid fields an
>> endian-unsafe union, add the value to struct thread_info and always use
>> READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() when accessing this field.
> I'm still hammering on this one ;)
>
> The comment below is better way of putting that it would basically leave
> some fields that look like they can be used which can't. Given they
> are under ifdef CONFIG_X86_CPU_RESCTRL anyway it would be very odd
> to use a union. Would just be a new appropriately ifdef protected variable
> right next to them in the file. I'd be tempted to just drop the bit
> about union and say why it makes sense to instead put it in
> struct thread_info (basically because it's arch specific and we can
> avoid even more ifdef mess?)
>
>
>>
>> Resctrl allows a per-cpu 'default' value to be set, this overrides the
>> values when scheduling a task in the default control-group, which has
>> PARTID 0. The way 'code data prioritisation' gets emulated means the
>> register value for the default group needs to be a variable.
>>
>> The current system register value is kept in a per-cpu variable to avoid
>> writing to the system register if the value isn't going to change. Writes
>> to this register may reset the hardware state for regulating bandwidth.
>>
>> Finally, there is no reason to context switch these registers unless there
>> is a driver changing the values in struct task_struct. Hide the whole thing
>> behind a static key. This also allows the driver to disable MPAM in
>> response to errors reported by hardware. Move the existing static key to
>> belong to the arch code, as in the future the MPAM driver may become a
>> loadable module.
>>
>> All this should depend on whether there is an MPAM driver, hide it behind
>> CONFIG_ARM64_MPAM.
>>
>> CC: Amit Singh Tomar <amitsinght@marvell.com>
>> Signed-off-by: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>
>> ---
>> CONFIG_MPAM -> CONFIG_ARM64_MPAM in commit message
>> Remove extra DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE
>> Function name in comment, __mpam_sched_in() -> mpam_thread_switch()
>> Remove unused headers
>> Expand comment (Jonathan)
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 +
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 3 ++
>> arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
>> arch/arm64/kernel/mpam.c | 13 +++++
>> arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 7 +++
>> drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c | 2 -
>> drivers/resctrl/mpam_internal.h | 4 +-
>> 8 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h
>> create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/mpam.c
>>
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..2ab3dca6977c
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h
>
>> +/*
>> + * The resctrl filesystem writes to the partid/pmg values for threads and CPUs,
>> + * which may race with reads in mpam_thread_switch(). Ensure only one of the old
>> + * or new values are used. Particular care should be taken with the pmg field as
>> + * mpam_thread_switch() may read a partid and pmg that don't match, causing this
>> + * value to be stored with cache allocations, despite being considered 'free' by
>> + * resctrl.
>> + *
>> + * A value in struct thread_info is used instead of struct task_struct as the
>> + * cpu's u64 register format is used. In struct task_struct there are two u32,
>> + * rmid and closid for the x86 case, but as we can't use them here do something
>> + * else. Creating a union would mean only accesses from the created u64 would be
>> + * endian safe and so be less clear.
>
> I'd just put this as something:
> * The closid and rmid in task_struct can't be directly reused as a u64 is needed.
> * As such, a suitable variable in struct thread_info is used instead with the
> * benefit of that being clearly an architecture specific location.
>
> or be more cynical and keep it for the patch description only. To me location
> of this u64 doesn't really feel like a design decision we need to record for the ages.
>
> With something like the suggested text, or the paragraph just dropped
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>

Thanks! I've just dropped this comment as it seems like more trouble
than it's worth and updated the paragraph in the commit message to read:

"To avoid this, the partid and pmg are always read and written as a
pair. This requires a new u64 field. In struct task_struct there are two
u32, rmid and closid for the x86 case, but as we can't use them here do
something else. Add this new field, mpam_partid_pmg, to struct
thread_info to avoid adding more architecture specific code to struct
task_struct. Always use READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() when accessing this field."

>
>> + */
>> +static inline u64 mpam_get_regval(struct task_struct *tsk)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_MPAM
>> + return READ_ONCE(task_thread_info(tsk)->mpam_partid_pmg);
>> +#else
>> + return 0;
>> +#endif
>> +}
>
>

Thanks,

Ben