From: Dave.Martin@arm.com (Dave Martin)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 01/13] ARM: suspend: use hash of cpu_logical_map value to index into save array
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 10:15:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130730091511.GA2478@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1307292155040.15022@syhkavp.arg>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:08:06PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 04:31:17AM +0100, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > Currently we hash the MPIDR of the CPU being suspended to determine which
> > > entry in the sleep_save_sp array to use. In some situations, such as when
> > > we want to resume on another physical CPU, the MPIDR of another CPU should
> > > be used instead.
> > >
> > > So let's use the value of cpu_logical_map(smp_processor_id()) in place
> > > of the MPIDR in the suspend path. This will result in the same index
> > > being used as with the previous code unless the caller has modified
> > > cpu_logical_map() beforehand.
> >
> > I will rely on your wisdom to rewrite the commit log in a way that
> > does not hint at dangerous creativity, if you catch my drift :D
>
> I've augmented it with some of the earlier comments from Dave Martin.
> I think it is fine to be clear in the commit log about what we intend
> this change to be used for.
>
> > > The register allocation in __cpu_suspend is reworked in order to better
> > > accommodate the additional argument.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm/kernel/sleep.S | 25 +++++++++++--------------
> > > arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c | 8 +++++---
> > > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/sleep.S b/arch/arm/kernel/sleep.S
> > > index db1536b8b3..836d10e698 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/sleep.S
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/sleep.S
> > > @@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
> > > * specific registers and some other data for resume.
> > > * r0 = suspend function arg0
> > > * r1 = suspend function
> > > + * r2 = MPIDR value used to index into sleep_save_sp
> >
> > CPU's MPIDR or something like that, let's not hint at possible creative usage.
>
> What about "MPIDR of the CPU to be resumed" which should normally just
> be the current CPU's?
>
> After all, creativity is not always a bad thing given it is reviewed
> properly.
OK, sounds reasonable.
>
> > > */
> > > ENTRY(__cpu_suspend)
> > > stmfd sp!, {r4 - r11, lr}
> > > @@ -67,23 +68,19 @@ ENTRY(__cpu_suspend)
> > > mov r5, sp @ current virtual SP
> > > add r4, r4, #12 @ Space for pgd, virt sp, phys resume fn
> > > sub sp, sp, r4 @ allocate CPU state on stack
> > > - stmfd sp!, {r0, r1} @ save suspend func arg and pointer
> > > - add r0, sp, #8 @ save pointer to save block
> > > - mov r1, r4 @ size of save block
> > > - mov r2, r5 @ virtual SP
> > > ldr r3, =sleep_save_sp
> > > + stmfd sp!, {r0, r1} @ save suspend func arg and pointer
> > > ldr r3, [r3, #SLEEP_SAVE_SP_VIRT]
> > > - ALT_SMP(mrc p15, 0, r9, c0, c0, 5)
> > > - ALT_UP_B(1f)
> > > - ldr r8, =mpidr_hash
> > > - /*
> > > - * This ldmia relies on the memory layout of the mpidr_hash
> > > - * struct mpidr_hash.
> > > - */
> > > - ldmia r8, {r4-r7} @ r4 = mpidr mask (r5,r6,r7) = l[0,1,2] shifts
> > > - compute_mpidr_hash lr, r5, r6, r7, r9, r4
> > > - add r3, r3, lr, lsl #2
> > > + ALT_SMP(ldr r0, =mpidr_hash)
> > > + ALT_UP_B(1f)
> >
> > Should be a tab, do not know if that's an email server issue or not.
>
> Amistake on my part.
>
> > > + /* This ldmia relies on the memory layout of the mpidr_hash struct */
> > > + ldmia r0, {r1, r6-r8} @ r1 = mpidr mask (r6,r7,r8) = l[0,1,2] shifts
> > > + compute_mpidr_hash r0, r6, r7, r8, r2, r1
> > > + add r3, r3, r0, lsl #2
> > > 1:
> > > + mov r2, r5 @ virtual SP
> > > + mov r1, r4 @ size of save block
> > > + add r0, sp, #8 @ pointer to save block
> >
> > It is already a bit complex to follow, code is ok, but line above was
> > better placed closer to sp last change, not after hashing the MPIDR.
>
> Well, I tend to disagree. I think it is much clearer to set function
> arguments closer to the call site so that r0 doesn't have to be live
> with the stack location throughout this code.
Fair point, but I'm happy either way.
With or without, feel free to add
Reviewed-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cheers
---Dave
>
> > > bl __cpu_suspend_save
> > > adr lr, BSYM(cpu_suspend_abort)
> > > ldmfd sp!, {r0, pc} @ call suspend fn
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c b/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c
> > > index 41cf3cbf75..2835d35234 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/suspend.c
> > > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
> > > #include <asm/suspend.h>
> > > #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
> > >
> > > -extern int __cpu_suspend(unsigned long, int (*)(unsigned long));
> > > +extern int __cpu_suspend(unsigned long, int (*)(unsigned long), u32 cpuid);
> > > extern void cpu_resume_mmu(void);
> > >
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_MMU
> > > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ extern void cpu_resume_mmu(void);
> > > int cpu_suspend(unsigned long arg, int (*fn)(unsigned long))
> > > {
> > > struct mm_struct *mm = current->active_mm;
> > > + u32 __mpidr = cpu_logical_map(smp_processor_id());
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > if (!idmap_pgd)
> > > @@ -32,7 +33,7 @@ int cpu_suspend(unsigned long arg, int (*fn)(unsigned long))
> > > * resume (indicated by a zero return code), we need to switch
> > > * back to the correct page tables.
> > > */
> > > - ret = __cpu_suspend(arg, fn);
> > > + ret = __cpu_suspend(arg, fn, __mpidr);
> > > if (ret == 0) {
> > > cpu_switch_mm(mm->pgd, mm);
> > > local_flush_bp_all();
> > > @@ -44,7 +45,8 @@ int cpu_suspend(unsigned long arg, int (*fn)(unsigned long))
> > > #else
> > > int cpu_suspend(unsigned long arg, int (*fn)(unsigned long))
> > > {
> > > - return __cpu_suspend(arg, fn);
> > > + u32 __mpidr = cpu_logical_map(smp_processor_id());
> > > + return __cpu_suspend(arg, fn, __mpidr);
> > > }
> > > #define idmap_pgd NULL
> > > #endif
> >
> > Apart from these nits, let's hope it is the last cpu_suspend bit we need to
> > change, please land it on -next asap, of course if Russell is ok with that.
> >
> > I tested it on TC2.
> >
> > FWIW:
> >
> > Acked-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Nicolas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-30 9:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-23 3:31 [PATCH 00/13] The big.LITTLE In-Kernel Switcher (IKS), part 1 Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 01/13] ARM: suspend: use hash of cpu_logical_map value to index into save array Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-24 16:47 ` Dave Martin
2013-07-24 18:55 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-25 10:55 ` Dave Martin
2013-07-25 16:06 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 11:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 14:41 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 15:34 ` Dave Martin
2013-07-26 15:43 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 15:45 ` Dave Martin
2013-07-26 17:04 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 19:19 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-29 11:50 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-30 2:08 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-30 9:15 ` Dave Martin [this message]
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 02/13] ARM: gic: add CPU migration support Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-25 11:44 ` Jonathan Austin
2013-07-25 19:11 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 03/13] ARM: b.L: core switcher code Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-25 17:15 ` Jonathan Austin
2013-07-25 20:20 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 10:45 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 14:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 14:53 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-07-26 15:10 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 04/13] ARM: bL_switcher: add clockevent save/restore support Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 05/13] ARM: bL_switcher: move to dedicated threads rather than workqueues Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-26 15:18 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-26 15:39 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 06/13] ARM: bL_switcher: simplify stack isolation Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 07/13] ARM: bL_switcher: hot-unplug half of the available CPUs Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 08/13] ARM: bL_switcher: do not hardcode GIC IDs in the code Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 09/13] ARM: bL_switcher: ability to enable and disable the switcher via sysfs Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 10/13] ARM: bL_switcher: add kernel cmdline param to disable the switcher on boot Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 11/13] ARM: bL_switcher: veto CPU hotplug requests when the switcher is active Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-31 10:30 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-08-05 4:25 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 12/13] ARM: bL_switcher: remove assumptions between logical and physical CPUs Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-30 16:30 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-30 19:15 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-07-31 9:41 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2013-07-23 3:31 ` [PATCH 13/13] ARM: bL_switcher: add a simple /dev user interface for debugging purposes Nicolas Pitre
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=20130730091511.GA2478@localhost.localdomain \
--to=dave.martin@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).