Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] RISC-V Hardware Probing User Interface

Jessica Clarke
2023-02-06T21:12:01Z

On 6 Feb 2023, at 20:14, Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com> wrote:
>
>
> These are very much up for discussion, as it's a pretty big new user
> interface and it's quite a bit different from how we've historically
> done things: this isn't just providing an ISA string to userspace, this
> has its own format for providing information to userspace.
>
> There's been a bunch of off-list discussions about this, including at
> Plumbers. The original plan was to do something involving providing an
> ISA string to userspace, but ISA strings just aren't sufficient for a
> stable ABI any more: in order to parse an ISA string users need the
> version of the specifications that the string is written to, the version
> of each extension (sometimes at a finer granularity than the RISC-V
> releases/versions encode), and the expected use case for the ISA string
> (ie, is it a U-mode or M-mode string). That's a lot of complexity to
> try and keep ABI compatible and it's probably going to continue to grow,
> as even if there's no more complexity in the specifications we'll have
> to deal with the various ISA string parsing oddities that end up all
> over userspace.
>
> Instead this patch set takes a very different approach and provides a set
> of key/value pairs that encode various bits about the system. The big
> advantage here is that we can clearly define what these mean so we can
> ensure ABI stability, but it also allows us to encode information that's
> unlikely to ever appear in an ISA string (see the misaligned access
> performance, for example). The resulting interface looks a lot like
> what arm64 and x86 do, and will hopefully fit well into something like
> ACPI in the future.
>
> The actual user interface is a syscall. I'm not really sure that's the
> right way to go about this, but it makes for flexible prototying.
> Various other approaches have been talked about like making HWCAP2 a
> pointer, having a VDSO routine, or exposing this via sysfs. Those seem
> like generally reasonable approaches, but I've yet to figure out a way
> to get the general case working without a syscall as that's the only way
> I've come up with to deal with the heterogenous CPU case. Happy to hear
> if someone has a better idea, though, as I don't really want to add a
> syscall if we can avoid it.

Please work with https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-c-api-doc as
it’s crucial we have a portable standard interface for applications to
query this information that works on OSes other than Linux. This can be
backed by whatever you want, whether a syscall, magic VDSO thing,
sysfs, etc, but it’s key that the exposed interface outside of libc is
not Linux-specific otherwise we’re going to get fragmentation in this
space.

I would encourage figuring out the right shape for the exposed
interface first before continuing to refine details of how that
information gets communicated between the kernel and libc.

Jess

> An example series in glibc exposing this syscall and using it in an
> ifunc selector for memcpy can be found at [1].
>
> [1] https://public-inbox.org/libc-alpha/20230206194819.1679472-1-evan@rivosinc.com/T/#t
>
> Changes in v2:
> - Changed the interface to look more like poll(). Rather than supplying
> key_offset and getting back an array of values with numerically
> contiguous keys, have the user pre-fill the key members of the array,
> and the kernel will fill in the corresponding values. For any key it
> doesn't recognize, it will set the key of that element to -1. This
> allows usermode to quickly ask for exactly the elements it cares
> about, and not get bogged down in a back and forth about newer keys
> that older kernels might not recognize. In other words, the kernel
> can communicate that it doesn't recognize some of the keys while
> still providing the data for the keys it does know.
> - Added a shortcut to the cpuset parameters that if a size of 0 and
> NULL is provided for the CPU set, the kernel will use a cpu mask of
> all online CPUs. This is convenient because I suspect most callers
> will only want to act on a feature if it's supported on all CPUs, and
> it's a headache to dynamically allocate an array of all 1s, not to
> mention a waste to have the kernel loop over all of the offline bits.
> - Fixed logic error in if(of_property_read_string...) that caused crash
> - Include cpufeature.h in cpufeature.h to avoid undeclared variable
> warning.
> - Added a _MASK define
> - Fix random checkpatch complaints
> - Updated the selftests to the new API and added some more.
> - Fixed indentation, comments in .S, and general checkpatch complaints.
>
> Evan Green (4):
> RISC-V: Move struct riscv_cpuinfo to new header
> RISC-V: Add a syscall for HW probing
> RISC-V: hwprobe: Support probing of misaligned access performance
> selftests: Test the new RISC-V hwprobe interface
>
> Palmer Dabbelt (2):
> RISC-V: hwprobe: Add support for RISCV_HWPROBE_BASE_BEHAVIOR_IMA
> dt-bindings: Add RISC-V misaligned access performance
>
> .../devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml | 15 ++
> Documentation/riscv/hwprobe.rst | 66 ++++++
> Documentation/riscv/index.rst | 1 +
> arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 23 +++
> arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h | 13 ++
> arch/riscv/include/asm/smp.h | 9 +
> arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h | 3 +
> arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h | 35 ++++
> arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/unistd.h | 8 +
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c | 11 +-
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 31 ++-
> arch/riscv/kernel/sys_riscv.c | 192 +++++++++++++++++-
> tools/testing/selftests/Makefile | 1 +
> tools/testing/selftests/riscv/Makefile | 58 ++++++
> .../testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/Makefile | 10 +
> .../testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c | 89 ++++++++
> .../selftests/riscv/hwprobe/sys_hwprobe.S | 12 ++
> tools/testing/selftests/riscv/libc.S | 46 +++++
> 18 files changed, 613 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/riscv/hwprobe.rst
> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/riscv/Makefile
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/Makefile
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/hwprobe.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/riscv/hwprobe/sys_hwprobe.S
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/riscv/libc.S
>
> --
> 2.25.1
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv