From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@au1.ibm.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: linuxppc dev list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Michael Neuling <michael.neuling@au1.ibm.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/mm/radix: Synchronize updates to the process table
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:40:06 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170710144006.669cab3a@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1499461936.3397.13.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
On Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:12:16 -0500
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> When writing to the process table, we need to ensure the store is
> visible to a subsequent access by the MMU. We assume we never have
> the PID active while doing the update, so a ptesync/isync pair
> should hopefully be a big enough hammer for our purpose.
>
Do we need this if it's going from invalid->valid?
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> ---
>
> Note: Architecturally, we also need to use a tlbie(l) with RIC=2
> to flush the process table cache. However this is (very) expensive
> and we know that POWER9 will invalidate its cache when hitting the
> mtpid instruction.
>
> To be safe, we should add the tlbie for any ARCH300 processor we
> don't know about though. (Aneesh, Nick do we need a ftr bit ?)
Good question, I'm not sure. Aside from this particular thing, it
seems like a good idea in general to add implementation specific
tests into the ftr framework.
We could add the PVR into it so we don't have to pollute FTR bits.
The POWER9_DD1 bit for example could just be a PVR mask and cmp.
>
> arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_book3s64.c | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_book3s64.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_book3s64.c
> index 9404b5e..e3e2803 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_book3s64.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/mmu_context_book3s64.c
> @@ -138,6 +138,14 @@ static int radix__init_new_context(struct mm_struct *mm)
> rts_field = radix__get_tree_size();
> process_tb[index].prtb0 = cpu_to_be64(rts_field | __pa(mm->pgd) | RADIX_PGD_INDEX_SIZE);
>
> + /*
> + * Order the above store with subsequent update of the PID
> + * register (at which point HW can start loading/caching
> + * the entry) and the corresponding load by the MMU from
> + * the L2 cache.
> + */
> + asm volatile("ptesync;isync" : : : "memory");
> +
> mm->context.npu_context = NULL;
>
> return index;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-10 4:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-07 21:12 [PATCH 2/2] powerpc/mm/radix: Synchronize updates to the process table Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-07-10 4:40 ` Nicholas Piggin [this message]
2017-07-10 6:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2017-07-11 12:48 ` [2/2] " 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=20170710144006.669cab3a@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=npiggin@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael.neuling@au1.ibm.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).