From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
luto@kernel.org, vincenzo.frascino@arm.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc/32: Switch VDSO to C implementation.
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:21:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <09d07ad3-47a2-db2f-2f14-e002b22d8d9e@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87d0bslo7b.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Hi Thomas,
On 01/09/2020 02:05 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Christophe!
>
> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:
>> In do_hres(), I see:
>>
>> cycles = __arch_get_hw_counter(vd->clock_mode);
>> ns = vdso_ts->nsec;
>> last = vd->cycle_last;
>> if (unlikely((s64)cycles < 0))
>> return -1;
>>
>> __arch_get_hw_counter() returns a u64 values. On the PPC, this is read
>> from the timebase which is a 64 bits counter.
>>
>> Why returning -1 if (s64)cycles < 0 ? Does it means we have to mask out
>> the most significant bit when reading the HW counter ?
>
> Only if you expect the HW counter to reach a value which has bit 63
> set. That'd require:
>
> uptime counter frequency
>
> ~292 years 1GHz
> ~ 58 years 5GHz
>
> assumed that the HW counter starts at 0 when the box is powered on.
>
> The reason why this is implemented in this way is that
> __arch_get_hw_counter() needs a way to express that the clocksource of
> the moment is not suitable for VDSO so that the syscall fallback gets
> invoked.
>
> Sure we could have used a pointer for the value and a return value
> indicating the validity, but given the required uptime the resulting
> code overhead seemed to be not worth it. At least not for me as I'm not
> planning to be around 58 years from now :)
>
I managed to get better code and better performance by splitting out the
validity check as follows. Would it be suitable for all arches ?
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
index 689f51b0d8c9..11cdd6faa4ad 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h
@@ -114,15 +114,17 @@ int clock_getres32_fallback(clockid_t _clkid,
struct old_timespec32 *_ts)
return ret;
}
-static __always_inline u64 __arch_get_hw_counter(s32 clock_mode)
+static __always_inline bool __arch_is_hw_counter_valid(s32 clock_mode)
{
/*
* clock_mode == 0 implies that vDSO are enabled otherwise
* fallback on syscall.
*/
- if (clock_mode)
- return ULLONG_MAX;
+ return clock_mode ? false : true;
+}
+static __always_inline u64 __arch_get_hw_counter(s32 clock_mode)
+{
return get_tb();
}
diff --git a/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c b/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
index ee9da52a3e02..90bb5dfd0db0 100644
--- a/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
+++ b/lib/vdso/gettimeofday.c
@@ -46,11 +46,12 @@ static inline int do_hres(const struct vdso_data
*vd, clockid_t clk,
do {
seq = vdso_read_begin(vd);
+ if (!__arch_is_hw_counter_valid(vd->clock_mode))
+ return -1;
+
cycles = __arch_get_hw_counter(vd->clock_mode);
ns = vdso_ts->nsec;
last = vd->cycle_last;
- if (unlikely((s64)cycles < 0))
- return -1;
ns += vdso_calc_delta(cycles, last, vd->mask, vd->mult);
ns >>= vd->shift;
Thanks
Christophe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-09 15:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-21 12:53 [RFC PATCH] powerpc/32: Switch VDSO to C implementation Christophe Leroy
2019-10-21 21:29 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-10-22 9:01 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-22 13:56 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-26 13:55 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-10-26 15:54 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-26 15:53 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-10-26 16:06 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-26 18:48 ` Thomas Gleixner
2019-10-26 23:06 ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-10-27 9:21 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-27 19:07 ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-20 18:24 ` Christophe Leroy
2020-01-09 14:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-09 15:21 ` Christophe Leroy [this message]
2020-01-10 22:42 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=09d07ad3-47a2-db2f-2f14-e002b22d8d9e@c-s.fr \
--to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincenzo.frascino@arm.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).