From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:22806 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726207AbfCZVWf (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:22:35 -0400 Message-ID: <580c6c604d3915c105f076fc7f22ab5da98598fc.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/17] fpga: dfl: fme: support 512bit data width PR From: Scott Wood Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:22:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <1553483264-5379-1-git-send-email-hao.wu@intel.com> <1553483264-5379-4-git-send-email-hao.wu@intel.com> <127a9356a7bf597d35dd361f2b16bf80460f0370.camel@redhat.com> <655bf2991a4f8bf6a473c91218d6dba7748520aa.camel@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-fpga-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org To: Alan Tull Cc: Wu Hao , Moritz Fischer , linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Ananda Ravuri , Xu Yilun On Tue, 2019-03-26 at 14:33 -0500, Alan Tull wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 5:58 PM Scott Wood wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 17:53 -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 11:07 +0800, Wu Hao wrote: > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_X86) && defined(CONFIG_AS_AVX512) > > > > + > > > > +#include > > > > + > > > > +static inline void copy512(void *src, void __iomem *dst) > > > > +{ > > > > + kernel_fpu_begin(); > > > > + > > > > + asm volatile("vmovdqu64 (%0), %%zmm0;" > > > > + "vmovntdq %%zmm0, (%1);" > > > > + : > > > > + : "r"(src), "r"(dst)); > > > > + > > > > + kernel_fpu_end(); > > > > +} > > > > > > Shouldn't there be some sort of check that AVX512 is actually > > > supported > > > on the running system? > > > > > > Also, src should be const, and the asm statement should have a memory > > > clobber. > > > > > > > +#else > > > > +static inline void copy512(void *src, void __iomem *dst) > > > > +{ > > > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1); > > > > +} > > > > +#endif > > > > > > Likewise, this will be called if a revision 2 device is used on non- > > > x86 > > > (or on x86 with an old binutils). The driver should fall back to 32- > > > bit > > > in such cases. > > > > Sorry, I missed the comment about revision 2 only being on integrated > > devices -- but will that always be the case? Seems worthwhile to check > > for > > AVX512 support anyway. And there's still the possibility of being built > > with an old binutils such that CONFIG_AS_AVX512 is not set, or running > > on a > > kernel where avx512 was disabled via a boot option. > > The code checks for CONFIG_AS_AVX512 above. That just indicates that binutils supports it. Plus, the code does not check for CONFIG_AS_AVX512 when deciding whether to set pr_datawidth to 64 (and thus call copy512), so you'll get a WARN_ON rather than falling back to 32-bit. > What boot option are you referring to? clearcpuid=304 -Scott