linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 9/9] arm64: Work around systems with mismatched cache line sizes
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 18:00:34 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160826170034.GD15779@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160826161627.GL30302@arm.com>

On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 05:16:27PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 02:08:01PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > On 26/08/16 14:04, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > >On 26/08/16 12:03, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > >>IMO, this is a pattern that we should avoid: you are introducing one
> > >>instance now, which will make it hard to say no to the next one in the
> > >>future. Isn't there a better way to organize the arm64_ftr_reg array
> > >>that allows us to reference entries directly? Ideally, a way that gets
> > >>rid of the runtime sorting, since I don't think that is a good
> > >>replacement for developer discipline anyway (although I should have
> > >>spoken up when that was first introduced) Or am I missing something
> > >>here?

I'm not sure we can have some simple direct access. Suzuki did some
grouping originally but I wouldn't call that a direct access either,
more like iterating through several groups.

A possibility would be to generate global variables for each
arm64_ftr_reg with the ARM64_FTR_REG macro extended to also place a
pointer in a dedicated section to be used as array. Assembly code would
access the global variable directly. But I'm not really sure it's worth
it.

> > >I had some form of direct access to the feature register in one of
> > >the versions [0], but was dropped based on Catalin's suggestion at [1].
> > 
> > Forgot to add, [0] wouldn't solve this issue cleanly either. It would simply
> > speed up the read_system_reg(). So we do need a call to read_system_reg()
> > from assembly code, which makes it a little bit tricky.
> 
> It might be worth looking to see if we can pass the ctr as an extra
> parameter to the assembly routines that need it. Then you can access it
> easily from C code, and if you pass it as 0 that could result in the asm
> code reading it from the h/w register, removing the need for the _raw
> stuff you add.

How often to we need to access a sanitised sysreg from assembly? AFAICT,
CTR_EL0 is the first. If we only need it to infer the minimum cache line
size, we could as well store the latter in a global variable and access
it directly. If we feel brave, we could patch a "mov \reg, #x"
instruction in the ?cache_line_size macros (starting with 32 by default,
though to make it less cumbersome we'd have to improve the run-time
patching code a bit).

-- 
Catalin

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-08-26 17:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-26  9:23 [PATCH v2 0/9] arm64: Work around for mismatched cache line size Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/9] arm64: Set the safe value for L1 icache policy Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/9] arm64: Use consistent naming for errata handling Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/9] arm64: Rearrange CPU errata workaround checks Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 4/9] arm64: alternative: Disallow patching instructions using literals Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 5/9] arm64: insn: Add helpers for adrp offsets Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 6/9] arm64: alternative: Add support for patching adrp instructions Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 7/9] arm64: Introduce raw_{d,i}cache_line_size Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 8/9] arm64: Refactor sysinstr exception handling Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26  9:23 ` [PATCH v2 9/9] arm64: Work around systems with mismatched cache line sizes Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26 11:03   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-08-26 13:04     ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26 13:08       ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-08-26 16:16         ` Will Deacon
2016-08-26 16:58           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-08-26 17:00           ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2016-09-02 10:03             ` Suzuki K Poulose

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=20160826170034.GD15779@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=catalin.marinas@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).