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 2D8ACD10F58 for ; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 16:07:43 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To: Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=Dqx3u01mED0F+Yub32DRXkCHKvfBmwxDp8TXww/mi1A=; b=G5+sP7JQAAL6B4 jZnaHnv3YKhjJHtyBgtFLWUrqgtVLIFIE0aTDQmbLuBnZmWcVdsHKvjx5VTExfLhO5K+lXLN34ofU UpbfO1ESK+aScT86Ey4CkTSvKue26dLPCfb8qe38104ejZ6wpX30e+R5Pmofj81qiYoumpNl5qwBD VNALS+II6gRM4ERdUTlBiUHr1fwdZBlEPyieJOVBygKCdlAb2EF/r9oHopcwUHQ3gq1gvHqfQdtVB WT0HpT1cOjfogwyRedi3Zv0CFaYOYAB2ZIHb+qUa9HUdGk3n4zLxonSXsmgCZFw8DFJLrDix3bA2Q xUANlSiXgNXeRmL0fYJg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vOI3H-0000000FEye-35vV; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 16:07:31 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1vOI3F-0000000FEyH-0dG4 for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 16:07:30 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B9C41692; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 08:07:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.33.153] (unknown [10.1.33.153]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 051ED3F73B; Wed, 26 Nov 2025 08:07:24 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4505a93b-2bac-4ce1-8971-4c31f1ce1362@arm.com> Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 16:07:23 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/22] mm: Always use page table accessor functions Content-Language: en-GB To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" , Lorenzo Stoakes Cc: Wei Yang , Samuel Holland , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Suren Baghdasaryan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport , Michal Hocko , Conor Dooley , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Alexandre Ghiti , Emil Renner Berthing , Rob Herring , Vlastimil Babka , "Liam R . Howlett" , Julia Lawall , Nicolas Palix , Anshuman Khandual References: <6bdf2b89-7768-4b90-b5e7-ff174196ea7b@lucifer.local> <71123d7a-641b-41df-b959-88e6c2a3a441@kernel.org> <20251126134726.yrya5xxayfcde3kl@master> <6b966403-91e0-4f06-86a9-a4f7780b9557@kernel.org> <1ca9f99f-6266-47ca-8c94-1a9b9aaa717f@kernel.org> <37973e21-e8f4-4603-b93d-4e0b1b2499fa@lucifer.local> From: Ryan Roberts In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20251126_080729_278678_0FDD1BDD X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.81 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 26/11/2025 15:12, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: > On 11/26/25 16:08, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 03:56:13PM +0100, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >>> On 11/26/25 15:52, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: >>>> >>>> Would the pmdp_get() never get invoked then? Or otherwise wouldn't that end up >>>> requiring a READ_ONCE() further up the stack? >>> >>> See my other reply, I think the pmdp_get() is required because all pud_* >>> functions are just simple stubs. >> >> OK, thought you were saying we should push further down the stack? Or up >> depending on how you view these things :P as in READ_ONCE at leaf? > > I think at leaf because I think the previous ones should essentially be only > used by stubs. > > But I haven't fully digested how this is all working. Or supposed to work. > > I'm trying to chew through the arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable-2level.h example to > see if I can make sense of it, I wonder if we can think about this slightly differently; READ_ONCE() has two important properties: - It guarrantees that a load will be issued, *even if output is unused* - It guarrantees that the read will be single-copy-atomic (no tearing) I think for the existing places where READ_ONCE() is used for pagetable reads we only care about: - It guarrantees that a load will be issued, *if output is used* - It guarrantees that the read will be single-copy-atomic (no tearing) I think if we can weaken to the "if output is used" property, then the compiler will optimize out all the unneccessary reads. AIUI, a C dereference provides neither of the guarrantees so that's no good. What about non-volatile asm? I'm told (thought need to verify) that for non-volatile asm, the compiler will emit it if the output is used and remove it otherwise. So if the asm contains the required single-copy-atomic, perhaps we are in business? So we would need a new READ_SCA() macro that could default to READ_ONCE() (which is stronger) and arches could opt in to providing a weaker asm version. Then the default pXdp_get() could be READ_SCA(). And this should work for all cases. I think. > >> >> Anyway. I am now designating you the expert at this ;) > > Oh no. :) > >> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> IOW, push the READ_ONCE() down to the lowest level so the previous ones >>>>> (that will get essentially ignore?) will get folded into the last >>>>> READ_ONCE()? >>>>> >>>>> But my head still hurts and I am focusing on something else concurrently :) >>>> >>>> Even if we could make this work, I don't love that there's some implicit >>>> assumption there that could easily break later on. >>>> >>>> I'd rather we kept it as stupid/obvious as possible... >>> >>> Looking at include/asm-generic/pgtable-nopmd.h I am not sure we are talking >>> about implicit assumptions here. It's kind-of the design that the pud_t >>> values are dummies, so why shoul the pudp_get() give you any guarantees. >>> >>> At least that's my current understanding, which might be very flawed :) >> >> I mean I'm waving my hands around like I'm working on an aircraft carrier here >> so if you're _sure_ it's _absolutely_ safe then fine :) > > Well, not yet ... :) > _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv