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=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,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 7C219C2BA2B for ; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 06:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 4872A206DA for ; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 06:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="E2yNbM1s" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4872A206DA Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-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=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=M29ZB+mEVopo7I/VNJXCY3CieEQvfjnyyeJkKbNGL1U=; b=E2yNbM1sV68I59mMDsS0syGGl L+8oitPrqKwzuI0f71alDx5DKnI5ZTQXPV2Ck0zZnJM5pb/zlXn6TuiKXscjBX8XwvkF10gqPR7Zw 7Zs4T0lCX5QmlQIT47abv9POYz6NOinS6eL6nF4MXPIaEsY4lPjxOr3nk/B3x8OOf/lR1rUl7nuCo X0t8vNnDf2aCV9b2Ky/LaWE83+fKEmrdFK3jSYjPAHdhuprYxt2qf/MaetEtQ/5BkI+g8t7e8xGKw WsjfY/8iWQK4ZgE5vH234LDvYeqCIaQtcZusmw54SXKTtvfjN1qtXIbMUnJIYPJRnOzwfqQoVRisu DnSUAPAaA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jN9nf-0002zl-Bq; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 06:39:31 +0000 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190] helo=huawei.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jN9nc-0002yj-2f for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 06:39:29 +0000 Received: from DGGEMS412-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 58568B82195A2B3DC390; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 14:39:23 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.173.220.190) by DGGEMS412-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.212) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Sat, 11 Apr 2020 14:39:15 +0800 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] arm64: cpufeatures: add support for tlbi range instructions To: Will Deacon References: <5DC960EB.9050503@huawei.com> <20191111132716.GA9394@willie-the-truck> <5DC96660.8040505@huawei.com> <3b833c82-2c1b-462a-f06f-d4c8b373dac1@huawei.com> <20200410115446.GA24814@willie-the-truck> <20200410120235.GC24814@willie-the-truck> From: Hanjun Guo Message-ID: <5af3a54c-c058-78a8-eba2-9e2ef666beee@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 14:39:13 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200410120235.GC24814@willie-the-truck> Content-Language: en-GB X-Originating-IP: [10.173.220.190] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200410_233928_287022_DA68CC6F X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 15.24 ) 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: mark.rutland@arm.com, Rob Herring , wanghuiqiang , Anna.Chen@arm.com, Zhenyu Ye , catalin.marinas@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, 'Matteo Carlini' , xiexiangyou@huawei.com, Linuxarm , Shaokun Zhang , tangnianyao@huawei.com, Marc Zyngier , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, qiuzhenfa@hisilicon.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2020/4/10 20:02, Will Deacon wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 12:54:46PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 09:43:49AM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> On 2019/11/20 9:29, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I also wonder if the ARMv8.4-TTL extension (which I have patches for in >>>>> the nested virt series) requires the same kind of treatment (after all, >>>>> it has an implicit range based on the base granule size and level). >>>>> >>>>> In any way, this requires careful specification, and I don't think >>>>> we can improvise this on the ML... ;-) >>>> >>>> Sure :), the good news is that ARM officially announced will be >>>> working with Huawei again. >>>> >>>> So if I understand your point correctly, we need steps to take: >>>> - ARM spec needs to make TIBi by range crystal clear and being >>>> written down in the spec; >>>> - Firmware description of supporting TLBi by range in system level >>>> for both FDT and ACPI; >>>> - Then upstream the code. >>> >>> Do we have update here? I noticed that the TLBI by rang for SMMU is >>> merged for upstream from Rob, any plan or progress for the CPU side? >>> >>> Sorry to ping you on the mailling list, our upcoming new chip has >>> this feature and it's good to enable it, so it's a bit urgent for us. >> >> Have you tried look at the latest version of the patches rather than >> "pinging" old history? We're also in the merge window at the moment, so >> please cut us some slack. >> >> I also fail to see the urgency. This thing is a pure performance play, and a >> fairly niche one at that. I'm not especially comfortable ripping up our TLBI >> code without being able to test it. > > Argh, so while it *is* the middle of the merge window and I do fail to see > the urgency of this, I also mixed it up with the TTL series, which is the one > I'm really worried about. > > Please post a v3 at -rc1. A bit lost here, do you mean the TLBi by range patch or the TTL series? Thanks Hanjun _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel