From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD214C55178 for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:47:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3506A2224E for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:47:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="G1FtTzrs"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="HuFl5bi2" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3506A2224E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=fme0SFpuLvdsbPBdX04whYHwBDgQ7e4MPxXTTdnSMzU=; b=G1FtTzrsyTgsX0Ha7oq3RmKoX NYKxS0JK85wrmR1yM2VWWSieGhTxZjSTixuZoF1yeUHeOYeB8mvJoenMzPtWCURoB9BgdAtAVw8Kw wstcAxTjJvL1ZO4Du0z5n2HAZEGIhBJpfkYfTNLBp9iYS05qMrZ2X/z+iUBojXsQgy5V54JWXTKzN wC9bvHJE2LihLqGYUkK7M63iC6KTi2Mk+TcZM6xF5MYgHglmeIsQEUAR02hs/GyDTXGA7D5UlBS3n QEMs/4C/sbNwTE58LhVNWrILlxyrcKRut4/d9sAk1L4vWiV3hUPY+d/avnLXOoVxyf3s11Bni6uK2 fGviVsBJw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kVFNA-0007yM-OY; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:45:52 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kVFN7-0007wz-Bq for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:45:50 +0000 Received: from willie-the-truck (236.31.169.217.in-addr.arpa [217.169.31.236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F9342224E; Wed, 21 Oct 2020 14:45:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603291548; bh=wfvIjqHr+sjTqVOz7H1HjcvSm8RF4NTzx29TGbux0yI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=HuFl5bi2G5W9Xi9o6sonzeiLJcU4BC8GZ32t1fQrSal3Qa1vxUoibbL9jHfLE/YqK 0IzwHS/v7P+C4KrVymEHwpji8YER0P29kHLoYqfZUlkhRGkJASJzle/Sh473Z4Fvor lcTLWpzgFXa5h9kKfkWGesUg8G4K/l0tHqQldg0s= Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 15:45:43 +0100 From: Will Deacon To: Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] arm64: Export id_aar64fpr0 via sysfs Message-ID: <20201021144542.GB17912@willie-the-truck> References: <20201021104611.2744565-1-qais.yousef@arm.com> <20201021104611.2744565-5-qais.yousef@arm.com> <63fead90e91e08a1b173792b06995765@kernel.org> <20201021121559.GB3976@gaia> <20201021133316.GF8004@e123083-lin> <20201021140945.GD3976@gaia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201021140945.GD3976@gaia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201021_104549_518814_DF28966A X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 25.01 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "Peter Zijlstra \(Intel\)" , Marc Zyngier , Qais Yousef , James Morse , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linus Torvalds , Morten Rasmussen , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 03:09:46PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 03:33:29PM +0200, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 01:15:59PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > one, though not as easy as automatic task placement by the scheduler (my > > > first preference, followed by the id_* regs and the aarch32 mask, though > > > not a strong preference for any). > > > > Automatic task placement by the scheduler would mean giving up the > > requirement that the user-space affinity mask must always be honoured. > > Is that on the table? > > I think Peter rejected it but I still find it a nicer interface from a > dumb application perspective. It may interact badly with cpusets though > (at least on Android). > > > Killing aarch32 tasks with an empty intersection between the > > user-space mask and aarch32_mask is not really "automatic" and would > > require the aarch32 capability to be exposed anyway. > > I agree, especially if overriding the user mask is not desirable. But if > one doesn't play around with cpusets, 32-bit apps would run "fine" with > the scheduler transparently placing them on the correct CPU. > > Anyway, if the task placement is entirely off the table, the next thing > is asking applications to set their own mask and kill them if they do > the wrong thing. Here I see two possibilities for killing an app: > > 1. When it ends up scheduled on a non-AArch32-capable CPU That sounds fine to me. If we could do the exception return and take a SIGILL, that's what we'd do, but we can't so we have to catch it before. > 2. If the user cpumask (bar the offline CPUs) is not a subset of the > aarch32_mask > > Option 1 is simpler but 2 would be slightly more consistent. I disagree -- if we did this for something like fpsimd, then the consistent behaviour would be to SIGILL on the cores without the instructions. > There's also the question on whether the kernel should allow an ELF32 to > be loaded (and potentially killed subsequently) if the user mask is not > correct on execve(). I don't see the point in distinguishing between "you did execve() on a core without 32-bit" and "you did execve() on a core with 32-bit and then migrated to a core without 32-bit". Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel