From: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
To: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@google.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: mte: allow async MTE to be upgraded to sync on a per-CPU basis
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 14:02:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5ee9d9a1-5b13-ea21-67df-e713c76fc163@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210602232445.3829248-1-pcc@google.com>
Hi Peter,
On 6/3/21 12:24 AM, Peter Collingbourne wrote:
> On some CPUs the performance of MTE in synchronous mode is the same
> as that of asynchronous mode. This makes it worthwhile to enable
> synchronous mode on those CPUs when asynchronous mode is requested,
> in order to gain the error detection benefits of synchronous mode
> without the performance downsides. Therefore, make it possible for CPUs
> to opt into upgrading to synchronous mode via a new mte-prefer-sync
> device tree attribute.
>
I had a look at your patch and I think that there are few points that are worth
mentioning:
1) The approach you are using is per-CPU hence we might end up with a system
that has some PE configured as sync and some configured as async. We currently
support only a system wide setting.
2) async and sync have slightly different semantics (e.g. in sync mode the
access does not take place and it requires emulation) this means that a mixed
configuration affects the ABI.
3) In your patch you use DT to enforce sync mode on a CPU, probably it is better
to have an MIDR scheme to mark these CPUs.
> Signed-off-by: Peter Collingbourne <pcc@google.com>
> Link: https://linux-review.googlesource.com/id/Id6f95b71fde6e701dd30b5e108126af7286147e8
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/process.c | 8 ++++++++
> arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> index b4bb67f17a2c..ba6ed0c1390c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> @@ -527,8 +527,16 @@ static void erratum_1418040_thread_switch(struct task_struct *prev,
> write_sysreg(val, cntkctl_el1);
> }
>
> +DECLARE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(bool, mte_prefer_sync);
> +
> static void update_sctlr_el1(u64 sctlr)
> {
> + if ((sctlr & SCTLR_EL1_TCF0_MASK) == SCTLR_EL1_TCF0_ASYNC &&
> + __this_cpu_read(mte_prefer_sync)) {
> + sctlr &= ~SCTLR_EL1_TCF0_MASK;
> + sctlr |= SCTLR_EL1_TCF0_SYNC;
> + }
> +
> /*
> * EnIA must not be cleared while in the kernel as this is necessary for
> * in-kernel PAC. It will be cleared on kernel exit if needed.
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index dcd7041b2b07..3a475722f768 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -56,6 +56,8 @@
>
> DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(int, cpu_number);
> EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL(cpu_number);
> +DEFINE_PER_CPU_READ_MOSTLY(bool, mte_prefer_sync);
> +EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL(mte_prefer_sync);
>
> /*
> * as from 2.5, kernels no longer have an init_tasks structure
> @@ -649,6 +651,16 @@ static void __init acpi_parse_and_init_cpus(void)
> #define acpi_parse_and_init_cpus(...) do { } while (0)
> #endif
>
> +/*
> + * Read per-CPU properties from the device tree and store them in per-CPU
> + * variables for efficient access later.
> + */
> +static void __init of_read_cpu_properties(int cpu, struct device_node *dn)
> +{
> + per_cpu(mte_prefer_sync, cpu) =
> + of_property_read_bool(dn, "mte-prefer-sync");
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Enumerate the possible CPU set from the device tree and build the
> * cpu logical map array containing MPIDR values related to logical
> @@ -789,6 +801,16 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
> set_cpu_present(cpu, true);
> numa_store_cpu_info(cpu);
> }
> +
> + if (acpi_disabled) {
> + struct device_node *dn;
> + int cpu = 0;
> +
> + for_each_of_cpu_node(dn) {
> + of_read_cpu_properties(cpu, dn);
> + cpu++;
> + }
> + }
> }
>
> static const char *ipi_types[NR_IPI] __tracepoint_string = {
>
--
Regards,
Vincenzo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-03 13:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-02 23:24 [PATCH] arm64: mte: allow async MTE to be upgraded to sync on a per-CPU basis Peter Collingbourne
2021-06-03 13:02 ` Vincenzo Frascino [this message]
2021-06-03 17:49 ` Peter Collingbourne
2021-06-08 14:43 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-06-08 19:54 ` Peter Collingbourne
2021-06-08 21:55 ` Evgenii Stepanov
2021-06-03 14:30 ` 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=5ee9d9a1-5b13-ea21-67df-e713c76fc163@arm.com \
--to=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=eugenis@google.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=pcc@google.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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).