From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 14:41:17 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] ARM: mm: kill unused TLB_CAN_READ_FROM_L1_CACHE and use ALT_SMP instead In-Reply-To: <51938B3D.2070508@free-electrons.com> References: <1364235581-17900-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> <1364235581-17900-4-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> <51938B3D.2070508@free-electrons.com> Message-ID: <20130515134117.GH23869@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:18:53PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: > Hi Will, Hi Gregory, > On 03/25/2013 07:19 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > > Many ARMv7 cores have hardware page table walkers that can read the L1 > > cache. This is discoverable from the ID_MMFR3 register, although this > > can be expensive to access from the low-level set_pte functions and is a > > pain to cache, particularly with multi-cluster systems. > > > > A useful observation is that the multi-processing extensions for ARMv7 > > require coherent table walks, meaning that we can make use of ALT_SMP > > patching in proc-v7-* to patch away the cache flush safely for these > > cores. > > I encountered a regression with 3.10-rc1 on the Armada 370 based boards. > With the 3.10-rc1 they hang during auto testy of the xor engine which are > mainly DMA transfers. If I revert this patch, it no more hang. I found this > by using bisect, it was not obvious at all for me that this patch may have > cause this regression. Is this using dmatest.ko, or a different test program? > The issue appear in SMP and in UP. However I think that the PJ4B-v7 used in > the Armada 370 are not MP capable. Ok, so the ALT_UP case should be emitted after patching, correct? > I made some investigation. And in UP if I remove the line: > ALT_UP(W(nop)) Did you remove the ALT_SMP case as well? You could also try making the ALT_SMP case use W(nop) too and see if it changes anything. > at the begining of the cpu_v7_dcache_clean_are macro located in > arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S > > Then the kernel boot again. It is not surprising because in this case > we found the same generated code that before this patch was applied. > > now I don't really understand why a W(nop) will cause this issue. No, that sounds weird. Can you inspect the functions using JTAG after the smp patching code has executed? > In SMP mode even with this line removed the kernel hang, but in this case > I am not sure of what happen exactly and how the .alt.smp.init section is > used. If you don't have both of the alternatives, things will go wrong. > I hope you will find some explanation and solution to this bug, because currently > the only solution I have is to revert this patch. Let's not jump to that just yet! Cheers, Will