From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/12] arm64/mm: Update non-range tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:41:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86pm19o1h2.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <59a62837-1adf-43a5-8716-8068ddbdb7cf@arm.com>
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:21:39 +0100,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On 20/10/2023 14:02, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:39:47 +0100,
> > Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 20/10/2023 09:05, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >>> Maybe. There is something to be said about making the range rework
> >>> (decreasing scale) an independent patch, as it is a significant change
> >>> on its own. But maybe the rest of the plumbing can be grouped
> >>> together.
> >>
> >> But that's effectively the split I have now, isn't it? The first patch
> >> introduces TLBI_TTL_UNKNOWN to enable use of 0 as a ttl hint. Then the second
> >> patch reworks the range stuff. I don't quite follow what you are suggesting.
> >
> > Not quite.
> >
> > What I'm proposing is that you pull the scale changes in their own
> > patch, and preferably without any change to the external API (i.e. no
> > change to the signature of the helper). They any extra change, such as
> > the TTL rework can go separately.
> >
> > So while this is similar to your existing split, I'd like to see it
> > without any churn around the calling convention. Which means turning
> > the ordering around, and making use of a static key in the various
> > helpers that need to know about LPA2.
>
> I don't think we can embed the static key usage directly inside
> __flush_tlb_range_op() (if that's what you were suggesting), because this macro
> is used by both the kernel (for its stage 1) and the hypervisor (for stage 2).
> And the kernel doesn't support LPA2 (until Ard's work is merged). So I think
> this needs to be an argument to the macro.
I can see two outcomes here:
- either you create separate helpers that abstract the LPA2-ness for
KVM and stick to non-LPA2 for the kernel (until Ard's series makes
it in)
- or you leave the whole thing disabled until we have full LPA2
support.
Eventually, you replace the whole extra parameter with a static key,
and nobody sees any churn.
> Or are you asking that I make the scale change universally, even if LPA2 is not
> in use? I could do that as its own change change (which I could benchmark), then
> add the rest in a separate change. But my thinking was that we would not want to
> change the algorithm for !LAP2 since it is not as effcient (due to the LPA2 64K
> alignment requirement).
I'm all for simplicity. If having an extra 15 potential TLBIs is
acceptable from a performance perspective, I won't complain. But I can
imagine that NV would be suffering from that (TLBIs on S2 have to
trap).
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-20 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-09 18:49 [PATCH v4 00/12] KVM: arm64: Support FEAT_LPA2 at hyp s1 and vm s2 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:49 ` [PATCH v4 01/12] arm64/mm: Update non-range tlb invalidation routines for FEAT_LPA2 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-19 8:03 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-19 9:22 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 8:05 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 12:39 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 13:02 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 13:21 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 13:41 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2023-10-09 18:49 ` [PATCH v4 02/12] arm64/mm: Update range-based " Ryan Roberts
2023-10-19 21:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 14:55 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:49 ` [PATCH v4 03/12] arm64/mm: Add FEAT_LPA2 specific ID_AA64MMFR0.TGRAN[2] Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 04/12] KVM: arm64: Add ARM64_HAS_LPA2 CPU capability Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 8:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 15:03 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-23 9:34 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-11-13 11:57 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-11-13 12:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 05/12] KVM: arm64: Add new (V)TCR_EL2 field definitions for FEAT_LPA2 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 06/12] KVM: arm64: Use LPA2 page-tables for stage2 and hyp stage1 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 9:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 15:06 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-23 9:36 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 07/12] KVM: arm64: Prepare TCR_EL2.PS in cpu_prepare_hyp_mode() Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 9:21 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 15:07 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 08/12] KVM: arm64: Convert translation level parameter to s8 Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 10:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 15:11 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 09/12] KVM: arm64: Support up to 5 levels of translation in kvm_pgtable Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 10/12] KVM: arm64: Allow guests with >48-bit IPA size on FEAT_LPA2 systems Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 11/12] KVM: selftests: arm64: Determine max ipa size per-page size Ryan Roberts
2023-10-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v4 12/12] KVM: selftests: arm64: Support P52V48 4K and 16K guest_modes Ryan Roberts
2023-10-20 10:54 ` [PATCH v4 00/12] KVM: arm64: Support FEAT_LPA2 at hyp s1 and vm s2 Marc Zyngier
2023-10-20 15:22 ` Ryan Roberts
2023-10-23 9:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2023-10-23 15:00 ` Ryan Roberts
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=86pm19o1h2.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox