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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7317C021AA for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:59:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:Cc: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=Ifri3yR9JqPppqU+vPutRv+m7t0Xgqqx49nMkg0VTfM=; b=2Yisd1QoANW1irAzkmphQhKOv7 Q+9W4mvhiq1e41fKFPfLhoTX/xGNOQRKPEVyjqyVpi/rfODPY0EK4KsCaknvke6xnf5WbgDgicXTr 8KlISbMAV0P944HYzk3Xaydy/zDPxwHYQb2+ltZdak17bWJSKUjk9rDtpZOhE12LZjrhlGtioPzpT rnnJ/zQSj17kvcA5hgyEukaK1sdpqweWbxqjE3CbU64NSxE8vvJhJSHqM08ngXOb8CXqB0tAwBYkj i7VZRe0jTTGDVU5e6QaX222I8PPTRez4CD86bF7fzLu0/jtgCdFUtwu8SkHCGk7LOm4Ahlij9GU7P QHj7fTdw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tktyV-0000000Fp8A-30OU; Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:59:31 +0000 Received: from out-178.mta1.migadu.com ([95.215.58.178]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tktx1-0000000Foo3-2I1P for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 19 Feb 2025 23:58:01 +0000 Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2025 15:57:43 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1740009477; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Ifri3yR9JqPppqU+vPutRv+m7t0Xgqqx49nMkg0VTfM=; b=SvJVt76nU1JxnDfk5q+yWKrTlGCEQpfmftMqIRk2LNwtwF3rXPOo5KCVH/4hudZahpSCrl kENdQUpu190uiMYsZF1YjZvUmIm+G06HfMpDLX5KZ7ye41gi3xgyZxvd21Cte1xg1P9dGb gBNx8keDX59z3P8z5VTgrEI7cVXO9BI= X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: =?utf-8?Q?Miko=C5=82aj?= Lenczewski Cc: ryan.roberts@arm.com, yang@os.amperecomputing.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, joey.gouly@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, yangyicong@hisilicon.com, robin.murphy@arm.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com, maz@kernel.org, liaochang1@huawei.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@redhat.com, baohua@kernel.org, ioworker0@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] arm64: Add BBM Level 2 cpu feature Message-ID: References: <20250219143837.44277-3-miko.lenczewski@arm.com> <20250219143837.44277-5-miko.lenczewski@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250219_155759_876907_ED0177CC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 25.98 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 03:34:12PM -0800, Oliver Upton wrote: > Hi Miko, > > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 02:38:38PM +0000, MikoĊ‚aj Lenczewski wrote: > > +config ARM64_ENABLE_BBML2 > > nit: consider calling this ARM64_BBML2_NOABORT or similar, since this > assumes behavior that exceeds the BBML2 baseline. > > > + bool "Enable support for Break-Before-Make Level 2 detection and usage" > > + default y > > + help > > + FEAT_BBM provides detection of support levels for break-before-make > > + sequences. If BBM level 2 is supported, some TLB maintenance requirements > > + can be relaxed to improve performance. Selecting N causes the kernel to > > + fallback to BBM level 0 behaviour even if the system supports BBM level 2. > > + > > [...] > > > +static bool has_bbml2_noconflict(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, > > + int scope) > > +{ > > + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_ENABLE_BBML2)) > > + return false; > > + > > + /* We want to allow usage of bbml2 in as wide a range of kernel contexts > > + * as possible. This list is therefore an allow-list of known-good > > + * implementations that both support bbml2 and additionally, fulfil the > > typo: fullfill I can't spell either ;-) > > + * extra constraint of never generating TLB conflict aborts when using > > + * the relaxed bbml2 semantics (such aborts make use of bbml2 in certain > > + * kernel contexts difficult to prove safe against recursive aborts). > > + */ > > We should be *very* specific of what qualifies a 'known-good' > implementation here. Implementations shouldn't be added to this list > based on the observed behavior, only if *the implementer* states their > design will not generate conflict aborts for BBML2 mapping granularity > changes. > > > + static const struct midr_range supports_bbml2_without_abort_list[] = { > > + MIDR_REV_RANGE(MIDR_CORTEX_X4, 0, 3, 0xf), > > + MIDR_REV_RANGE(MIDR_NEOVERSE_V3, 0, 2, 0xf), > > + {} > > + }; > > + > > + if (!is_midr_in_range_list(read_cpuid_id(), supports_bbml2_without_abort_list)) > > + return false; > > + > > + return true; > > +} > > + > > #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_PAN > > static void cpu_enable_pan(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *__unused) > > { > > @@ -2926,6 +2951,13 @@ static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_features[] = { > > .matches = has_cpuid_feature, > > ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS(ID_AA64MMFR2_EL1, EVT, IMP) > > }, > > + { > > + .desc = "BBM Level 2 without conflict abort", > > + .capability = ARM64_HAS_BBML2_NOCONFLICT, > > + .type = ARM64_CPUCAP_SYSTEM_FEATURE, > > + .matches = has_bbml2_noconflict, > > + ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS(ID_AA64MMFR2_EL1, BBM, 2) > > + }, > > { > > .desc = "52-bit Virtual Addressing for KVM (LPA2)", > > .capability = ARM64_HAS_LPA2, > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps b/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps > > index 1e65f2fb45bd..8d67bb4448c5 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps > > +++ b/arch/arm64/tools/cpucaps > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ HAS_ECV > > HAS_ECV_CNTPOFF > > HAS_EPAN > > HAS_EVT > > +HAS_BBML2_NOCONFLICT > > Please add this cap to cpucap_is_possible() test for the config option. > > Thanks, > Oliver