From: rabin@rab.in (Rabin Vincent)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: flush_dcache_page() in ARM vs ARM64
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:27:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161102132714.GA1326@lnxartpec.se.axis.com> (raw)
ARMv7-A and ARMv8-A are, as far as I can see, identical in which cache
behaviours they support. The data cache has to behave as PIPT while for
the instruction cache, PIPT, VIPT, and ASIC-tagged VIVT behaviours are
supported. See section B3.11 of the ARMv7-A ARM and section D4.9 of the
ARMv8-A ARM.
Both ARMv7-A with Multiprocessing Extensions and ARMv8-A broadcast cache
maintenance operations to other cores. See B2.2.5 of the ARMv7-A ARM
and D7.2.57 of the ARMv8-A ARM.
Both arch/arm/ (for ARMv6+) and arch/arm64/ define PG_arch_1 to be
PG_dcache_clean and use it to postpone flushing from flush_dcache_page()
to set_pte_at(). See arch/{arm,arm64}/mm/flush.c.
However, arch/arm64/'s flush_dcache_page() is implemented like this:
void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page)
{
if (test_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags))
clear_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
}
while arch/arm/ has this:
void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page)
{
struct address_space *mapping;
/*
* The zero page is never written to, so never has any dirty
* cache lines, and therefore never needs to be flushed.
*/
if (page == ZERO_PAGE(0))
return;
mapping = page_mapping(page);
if (!cache_ops_need_broadcast() &&
mapping && !page_mapcount(page))
clear_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
else {
__flush_dcache_page(mapping, page);
if (mapping && cache_is_vivt())
__flush_dcache_aliases(mapping, page);
else if (mapping)
__flush_icache_all();
set_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
}
}
Why does arch/arm/ flush the data cache area in flush_dcache_page() for
the (!mapping || page_mapcount(page)) case even on ARMv7+ME, while
arch/arm64/ doesn't for ARMv8?
Why does arch/arm/ invalidate the instruction cache in
flush_dcache_page() for the (mapping && page_count(page)) case even for
ARMv7+ME, while arch/arm64/ doesn't for ARMv8?
What would break with the following patch?
diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/flush.c b/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
index 3cced84..f1e6190 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mm/flush.c
@@ -327,6 +327,12 @@ void flush_dcache_page(struct page *page)
if (page == ZERO_PAGE(0))
return;
+ if (!cache_ops_need_broadcast() && cache_is_vipt_nonaliasing()) {
+ if (test_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags))
+ clear_bit(PG_dcache_clean, &page->flags);
+ return;
+ }
+
mapping = page_mapping(page);
if (!cache_ops_need_broadcast() &&
next reply other threads:[~2016-11-02 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-02 13:27 Rabin Vincent [this message]
2016-11-02 16:40 ` flush_dcache_page() in ARM vs ARM64 Catalin Marinas
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=20161102132714.GA1326@lnxartpec.se.axis.com \
--to=rabin@rab.in \
--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