From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: James Yang <James.Yang@freescale.com>
Cc: scottwood@freescale.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/ppc64: remove __volatile__ in get_current()
Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 10:20:10 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1377303610.3819.4.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1308231832570.4940@ra8135-ec1.am.freescale.net>
On Fri, 2013-08-23 at 18:40 -0500, James Yang wrote:
> Scott's been able to put enough doubt in me to think that this is not
> entirely safe, even though the testing and code generation show it to
> work. Please reject this patch.
>
> I think there is still value in getting the unnecessary loads to be
> removed since it would also allow unnecessary conditional branches to
> be removed. I'll think about alternate ways to do this.
Hrm, The problem has to do with PACA accesses moving around accross
preempt boundaries, it's a bit tricky, but in the case of "current"
shouldn't be a problem... while the rest of the PACA might change (CPU#
etc...) current remains stable for the point of view of a given thread.
So I think the patch is fine.
Scott ?
Now, we do need some serious rework of PACA accesses. I'm very *VERY*
nervous with what we have now. A bit of grepping shows dozens of cases
where gcc copies r13 into another register or even saves/restores it, it
scares the shit out of me :-)
My thinking is to make r13 a hidden reg like we do (or used to) on ppc32
with r2 and break down paca access into two forms:
- Direct access of a single field -> asm loads/stores inline
- Anything else, uses a get_paca/put_paca construct that includes a
preempt_disable/enable (and maybe along with a __get_paca/__put_paca
pair that doesn't). This basically does a mr of r13 into another
register and basically hides the whole lot from gcc.
The former would be used for single fields, the latter, while adding a
potentially unnecessary mr, will be much safer vs. gcc playing games
with r13.
Any volunteer ? Haven't had time to do it myself so far :-)
Cheers,
Ben.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-24 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-10 4:49 [PATCH] powerpc/ppc64: remove __volatile__ in get_current() James Yang
2013-08-23 23:40 ` James Yang
2013-08-23 23:48 ` Scott Wood
2013-08-24 0:22 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-08-24 0:20 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
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=1377303610.3819.4.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=James.Yang@freescale.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.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).