From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <npiggin@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pf0-x244.google.com (mail-pf0-x244.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::244])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3t8ZXB6rSYzDvQ1
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Thu,  3 Nov 2016 17:18:02 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: by mail-pf0-x244.google.com with SMTP id y68so3853719pfb.1
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 02 Nov 2016 23:18:02 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 17:17:51 +1100
From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: "Shreyas B. Prabhu" <shreyasbp@gmail.com>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mahesh J Salgaonkar
 <mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "Shreyas B .
 Prabhu" <shreyas@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/64s: relocation, register save fixes for system
 reset interrupt
Message-ID: <20161103171751.44798270@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAVMmb5Zj4oKVF6f3Ag0mEHOUrAYro65JyuULMO7+abRs4D=OQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20161013021714.6624-1-npiggin@gmail.com>
 <79d229aa-2b4e-67b7-157b-b839bc390cbf@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20161102175701.2ae8d1d3@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
 <20161102082433.GA17365@in.ibm.com>
 <20161102193624.7f0cbfee@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
 <20161102084548.GD17909@in.ibm.com>
 <20161103162100.1b50777e@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com>
 <CAAVMmb5Zj4oKVF6f3Ag0mEHOUrAYro65JyuULMO7+abRs4D=OQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Thu, 3 Nov 2016 01:56:46 -0400
"Shreyas B. Prabhu" <shreyasbp@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 1:21 AM, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 14:15:48 +0530
> > Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >  
> >> Hi Nick,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 07:36:24PM +1100, Nicholas Piggin wrote:  
> >> >
> >> > Okay, I'll work with that. What's the best way to make a P8 do
> >> > winkle sleeps?  
> >>
> >> From the userspace, offlining the CPUs of the core will put them to
> >> winkle.  
> >
> > Thanks for this. Hum, that r13 manipulation throughout the idle
> > and exception code is a bit interesting. I'll do the minimal patch
> > for 4.9, but what's the reason not to just use the winkle state
> > in the PACA rather than storing it into HSPRG0 bit, can you (or
> > Shreyas) explain?
> >  
> Hi Nick,
> 
> Before deep winkle, checking SRR1's wakeup bits (Bits 46:47) was enough to
> figure out which idle state we are waking up from. But in P8, SRR1's wakeup
> bits aren't enough since bits 46:47 are 0b11 for both fast sleep and
> deep winkle.
> So to distinguish bw fastsleep and deep winkle, we use the current HSPRG0/PORE
> trick. We program the PORE engine (which is used for state restore when waking
> up from deep winkle) to restore HSPRG0 with the last bit set (we do this in
> pnv_save_sprs_for_winkle()). R13 bit manipulation in pnv_restore_hyp_resource
> is related to this.

Right, I didn't realize how that exactly worked until I had to go read
the code just now. It's a neat little trick. I'm wondering can we use PACA_THREAD_IDLE_STATE==PNV_THREAD_WINKLE for this instead? It would just
make the early PACA usage in the exception handlers able to use more common
code.

Thanks,
Nick