public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] arm64: errata: Work around early CME DVMSync acknowledgement
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2026 12:19:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aarGQNNi1HfrcGyy@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aarB3iv8963UDn5E@arm.com>

On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 12:00:30PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2026 at 02:32:11PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 04:57:56PM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > +void sme_do_dvmsync(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * This is called from the TLB maintenance functions after the DSB ISH
> > > +	 * to send hardware DVMSync message. If this CPU sees the mask as
> > > +	 * empty, the remote CPU executing sme_set_active() would have seen
> > > +	 * the DVMSync and no IPI required.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (cpumask_empty(sme_active_cpus))
> > > +		return;
> > > +
> > > +	preempt_disable();
> > > +	smp_call_function_many(sme_active_cpus, sme_dvmsync_ipi, NULL, true);
> > > +	preempt_enable();
> > > +}
> > 
> > Why do we care about all CPUs using SME, rather than limiting it to the
> > set of CPUs using SME with the mm we've invalidated? This looks like it
> > will result in unnecessary cross-calls when multiple tasks are using SME
> > (especially as the mm flag is only cleared on fork).
> 
> Yes, it's a possibility but I traded it for simplicity. We also have the
> TTU case where we don't have an mm and we don't want to broadcast to all
> CPUs either, hence an sme_active_cpus mask. As I just replied on patch
> 2, for the TLB batching we wouldn't be able to use a cpumask in the
> batching structure since, per the ordering above, we need the DVMSync
> before checking if/where to send the IPI to.
> 
> For the typical TLBI (not TTU), we can track a per-mm mask passed down
> to this function (I have patches doing this but it didn't make a
> significant difference in benchmarks).

Reusing the current mm_cpumask(), something like below. We could also
scrap the MMCF_SME_DVMSYNC flag, though we end up always call
sme_do_dvmsync() and checking the mask, probably more expensive than a
flag check.

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
index e3ea0246a4f4..2c77ca41cb14 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ static inline unsigned long get_trans_granule(void)
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_ERRATUM_SME_DVMSYNC
-void sme_do_dvmsync(void);
+void sme_do_dvmsync(struct mm_struct *mm);
 
 static inline void sme_dvmsync(struct mm_struct *mm)
 {
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static inline void sme_dvmsync(struct mm_struct *mm)
 	if (mm && !test_bit(ilog2(MMCF_SME_DVMSYNC), &mm->context.flags))
 		return;
 
-	sme_do_dvmsync();
+	sme_do_dvmsync(mm);
 }
 #else
 static inline void sme_dvmsync(struct mm_struct *mm) { }
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
index 90015fc29722..37e215cd0f39 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
@@ -1378,6 +1378,7 @@ void sme_set_active(unsigned int cpu)
 	if (!test_bit(ilog2(MMCF_SME_DVMSYNC), &current->mm->context.flags))
 		set_bit(ilog2(MMCF_SME_DVMSYNC), &current->mm->context.flags);
 
+	cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(current->mm));
 	cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, sme_active_cpus);
 
 	/*
@@ -1398,6 +1399,7 @@ void sme_clear_active(unsigned int cpu)
 	 * With SCTLR_EL1.IESB enabled, the SME memory transactions are
 	 * completed on entering EL1.
 	 */
+	cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(current->mm));
 	cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, sme_active_cpus);
 }
 
@@ -1410,19 +1412,25 @@ static void sme_dvmsync_ipi(void *unused)
 	 */
 }
 
-void sme_do_dvmsync(void)
+void sme_do_dvmsync(struct mm_struct *mm)
 {
 	/*
 	 * This is called from the TLB maintenance functions after the DSB ISH
 	 * to send hardware DVMSync message. If this CPU sees the mask as
 	 * empty, the remote CPU executing sme_set_active() would have seen
 	 * the DVMSync and no IPI required.
+	 *
+	 * When an mm is provided, limit the IPI to CPUs that are actively
+	 * running SME code for that mm (recorded in mm_cpumask()), otherwise
+	 * fall back to the global sme_active_cpus mask.
 	 */
-	if (cpumask_empty(sme_active_cpus))
+	const struct cpumask *mask = mm ? mm_cpumask(mm) : sme_active_cpus;
+
+	if (cpumask_empty(mask))
 		return;
 
 	preempt_disable();
-	smp_call_function_many(sme_active_cpus, sme_dvmsync_ipi, NULL, true);
+	smp_call_function_many(mask, sme_dvmsync_ipi, NULL, true);
 	preempt_enable();
 }
 


  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-06 12:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-02 16:57 [PATCH 0/4] arm64: Work around C1-Pro erratum 4193714 (CVE-2026-0995) Catalin Marinas
2026-03-02 16:57 ` [PATCH 1/4] arm64: tlb: Use __tlbi_sync_s1ish_kernel() for kernel TLB maintenance Catalin Marinas
2026-03-03 13:12   ` Mark Rutland
2026-03-05 11:27     ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-09 12:12       ` Mark Rutland
2026-03-02 16:57 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: tlb: Pass the corresponding mm to __tlbi_sync_s1ish() Catalin Marinas
2026-03-05 14:33   ` Will Deacon
2026-03-05 19:19     ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-06 11:15       ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-12 15:00         ` Will Deacon
2026-03-13 16:27           ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-02 16:57 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: errata: Work around early CME DVMSync acknowledgement Catalin Marinas
2026-03-05 14:32   ` Will Deacon
2026-03-06 12:00     ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-06 12:19       ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2026-03-09 10:13       ` Vladimir Murzin
2026-03-10 15:35         ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-12 14:55           ` Will Deacon
2026-03-13 15:48             ` Catalin Marinas
2026-03-13 15:58               ` Will Deacon
2026-03-17 12:09             ` Mark Rutland
2026-03-02 16:57 ` [PATCH 4/4] KVM: arm64: Add SMC hook for SME dvmsync erratum Catalin Marinas
2026-03-05 14:32   ` Will Deacon
2026-03-06 12:52     ` 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=aarGQNNi1HfrcGyy@arm.com \
    --to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=oupton@kernel.org \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
    --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