linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] powerpc32: provide VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 15:21:04 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1455657664.2463.68.camel@buserror.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160211161650.1F12C1A2400@localhost.localdomain>

On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 17:16 +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> This patch provides VIRT_CPU_ACCOUTING to PPC32 architecture.
> PPC32 doesn't have the PACA structure, so we use the task_info
> structure to store the accounting data.
> 
> In order to reuse on PPC32 the PPC64 functions, all u64 data has
> been replaced by 'unsigned long' so that it is u32 on PPC32 and
> u64 on PPC64
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> ---
> Changes in v3: unlike previous version of the patch that was inspired
> from IA64 architecture, this new version tries to reuse as much as
> possible the PPC64 implementation.
> 
> PPC32 doesn't have PACA and past discusion on v2 version has shown
> that it is not worth implementing a PACA in PPC32 architecture
> (see below benh opinion)
> 
> benh: PACA is actually a data structure and you really really don't want it
> on ppc32 :-) Having a register point to current works, having a register
> point to per-cpu data instead works too (ie, change what we do today),
> but don't introduce a PACA *please* :-)

And Ben never replied to my reply at the time:

"What is special about 64-bit that warrants doing things differently from 32
-bit?  What is the difference between PACA and "per-cpu data", other than the
obscure name?"

I can understand wanting to avoid churn, but other than that, doing things 
differently on 64-bit versus 32-bit sucks.

> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
> index e245255..c4c33be 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputime.h
> @@ -230,7 +230,11 @@ static inline cputime_t clock_t_to_cputime(const
> unsigned long clk)
>  
>  #define cputime64_to_clock_t(ct)	cputime_to_clock_t((cputime_t)(ct))
>  
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
>  static inline void arch_vtime_task_switch(struct task_struct *tsk) { }
> +#else
> +void arch_vtime_task_switch(struct task_struct *tsk);
> +#endif

Add a comment explaining why this is empty on 64-bit but non-empty on 32-bit.

> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/asm
> -offsets.c
> index 07cebc3..b04b957 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/asm-offsets.c
> @@ -256,6 +256,13 @@ int main(void)
>  	DEFINE(PACA_TRAP_SAVE, offsetof(struct paca_struct, trap_save));
>  	DEFINE(PACA_NAPSTATELOST, offsetof(struct paca_struct,
> nap_state_lost));
>  	DEFINE(PACA_SPRG_VDSO, offsetof(struct paca_struct, sprg_vdso));
> +#else /* CONFIG_PPC64 */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING_NATIVE
> +	DEFINE(PACA_STARTTIME, offsetof(struct thread_info, starttime));
> +	DEFINE(PACA_STARTTIME_USER, offsetof(struct thread_info,
> starttime_user));
> +	DEFINE(PACA_USER_TIME, offsetof(struct thread_info, user_time));
> +	DEFINE(PACA_SYSTEM_TIME, offsetof(struct thread_info,
> system_time));
> +#endif
>  #endif /* CONFIG_PPC64 */

Can you change the name if it's not always going to be relative to a PACA?

> +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC32
> +#define get_paca()	task_thread_info(tsk)
> +#endif

Likewise, this is just going to cause confusion.

Can you bundle up the time accounting fields into a struct, that you share
between the paca and the 32-bit thread_info, and then have a macro to grab a
pointer to that?

-Scott

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-02-16 21:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-11 16:16 [PATCH v5] powerpc32: provide VIRT_CPU_ACCOUNTING Christophe Leroy
2016-02-12  8:25 ` Denis Kirjanov
2016-02-14 20:40 ` Denis Kirjanov
2016-02-15  9:33   ` Christophe Leroy
2016-02-16 21:21 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2016-02-17 16:29   ` Christophe Leroy
2016-02-23  1:22     ` Scott Wood
2016-02-23  2:04   ` Michael Ellerman
2016-02-23  2:15     ` Scott Wood
2016-02-23  3:25       ` Michael Ellerman

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=1455657664.2463.68.camel@buserror.net \
    --to=oss@buserror.net \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /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).