From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] arm64: Introduce IRQ stack
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 12:25:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150916112520.GH28771@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1442155337-7020-1-git-send-email-jungseoklee85@gmail.com>
On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 03:42:17PM +0100, Jungseok Lee wrote:
> Currently, kernel context and interrupts are handled using a single
> kernel stack navigated by sp_el1. This forces many systems to use
> 16KB stack, not 8KB one. Low memory platforms naturally suffer from
> memory pressure accompanied by performance degradation.
>
> This patch addresses the issue as introducing a separate percpu IRQ
> stack to handle both hard and soft interrupts with two ground rules:
>
> - Utilize sp_el0 in EL1 context, which is not used currently
> - Do not complicate current_thread_info calculation
>
> It is a core concept to trace struct thread_info using sp_el0 instead
> of sp_el1. This approach helps arm64 align with other architectures
> regarding object_is_on_stack() without additional complexity.
>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jungseok Lee <jungseoklee85@gmail.com>
> ---
> Changes since v1:
> - Rebased on top of v4.3-rc1
> - Removed Kconfig about IRQ stack, per James
> - Used PERCPU for IRQ stack, per James
> - Tried to allocate IRQ stack when CPU is about to start up, per James
> - Moved sp_el0 update into kernel_entry macro, per James
> - Dropped S_SP removal patch, per Mark and James
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h | 8 +++
> arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h | 7 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 5 ++
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 54 ++++++++++++++--
> arch/arm64/kernel/head.S | 3 +
> arch/arm64/kernel/irq.c | 21 ++++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 6 ++
> 7 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h
> index bbb251b..67975a2 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irq.h
> @@ -5,11 +5,19 @@
>
> #include <asm-generic/irq.h>
>
> +struct irq_stack {
> + void *stack;
> + unsigned long thread_sp;
> + unsigned int count;
> +};
> +
> struct pt_regs;
>
> extern void migrate_irqs(void);
> extern void set_handle_irq(void (*handle_irq)(struct pt_regs *));
>
> +extern int alloc_irq_stack(unsigned int cpu);
> +
> static inline void acpi_irq_init(void)
> {
> /*
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h
> index dcd06d1..44839c0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/thread_info.h
> @@ -73,8 +73,11 @@ static inline struct thread_info *current_thread_info(void) __attribute_const__;
>
> static inline struct thread_info *current_thread_info(void)
> {
> - return (struct thread_info *)
> - (current_stack_pointer & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1));
> + unsigned long sp_el0;
> +
> + asm volatile("mrs %0, sp_el0" : "=r" (sp_el0));
> +
> + return (struct thread_info *)(sp_el0 & ~(THREAD_SIZE - 1));
This looks like it will generate worse code than our current implementation,
thanks to the asm volatile. Maybe just add something like a global
current_stack_pointer_el0?
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-16 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-13 14:42 [PATCH v2] arm64: Introduce IRQ stack Jungseok Lee
2015-09-16 11:25 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2015-09-17 10:33 ` James Morse
2015-09-17 10:48 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-17 12:36 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-17 17:07 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-18 13:02 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-17 11:17 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-17 13:17 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-17 13:22 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-17 16:21 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-18 12:57 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-18 13:44 ` James Morse
2015-09-18 15:03 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-18 15:31 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-19 8:44 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-21 9:25 ` Catalin Marinas
2015-09-21 12:14 ` Jungseok Lee
2015-09-18 13:46 ` James Morse
2015-09-19 8:20 ` Jungseok Lee
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=20150916112520.GH28771@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@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).