From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3C3FC2BA19 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:16:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72BCF20857 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:16:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.b="P1A59HSH" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 72BCF20857 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=armlinux.org.uk Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495yby4ZC5zDqw0 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:16:14 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=armlinux.org.uk (client-ip=2001:4d48:ad52:3201:214:fdff:fe10:1be6; helo=pandora.armlinux.org.uk; envelope-from=linux+linuxppc-dev=lists.ozlabs.org@armlinux.org.uk; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=armlinux.org.uk Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; secure) header.d=armlinux.org.uk header.i=@armlinux.org.uk header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=pandora-2019 header.b=P1A59HSH; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from pandora.armlinux.org.uk (pandora.armlinux.org.uk [IPv6:2001:4d48:ad52:3201:214:fdff:fe10:1be6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 495yY06KgkzDqf2 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 19:13:39 +1000 (AEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=armlinux.org.uk; s=pandora-2019; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=YO6F5ObedfU/G1cBVZlRZ9Tclj+oI0shB5VAVt4/Ej0=; b=P1A59HSHX8OqJP5aEdGeiV/B2 v103CRxWtRZHmqa7NbuMTVDo44ZOmpRq6I05Ol6Qfmk/yPKSw46jyurTZX1KULRynoTJ7DDXfMahT ugzkH5msRllUA5/+9l7CtYY3E1Bi+tcQNSXhvvAU9cp1ya9Fqw8E+bJW/lc+8jbvfEnzcR+jDk9Tr h6eRjjHdbTlY7Ru4qvHMbf/Jx82P+r29op4ZbmdIDi1H9XLtzQlS7iweG7kPStFXjUaZfYafW9oJk q+JXPHTb/cQGKUlhwKX0wRzQ7Xz2naV1pjv9KhcBx58LwqJxxdeUBMFKJGiF5abHjK110/9F+T1s2 uasQ9fr8g==; Received: from shell.armlinux.org.uk ([2001:4d48:ad52:3201:5054:ff:fe00:4ec]:41518) by pandora.armlinux.org.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jQoxi-0000Ux-OB; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:13:03 +0100 Received: from linux by shell.armlinux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jQoxc-0006uR-F0; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:12:56 +0100 Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:12:56 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin To: Al Viro , Will Deacon Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] uaccess: Rename user_access_begin/end() to user_full_access_begin/end() Message-ID: <20200421091256.GA25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk> References: <36e43241c7f043a24b5069e78c6a7edd11043be5.1585898438.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <42da416106d5c1cf92bda1e058434fe240b35f44.1585898438.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> <20200403205205.GK23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200421024919.GA23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200421024919.GA23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch , linuxppc-dev , Kees Cook , Dave Airlie , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, Peter Anvin , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux-MM , Paul Mackerras , Daniel Vetter , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 03:49:19AM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > The only source I'd been able to find speeks of >= 60 cycles > (and possibly much more) for non-pipelined coprocessor instructions; > the list of such does contain loads and stores to a bunch of registers. > However, the register in question (p15/c3) has only store mentioned there, > so loads might be cheap; no obvious reasons for those to be slow. > That's a question to arm folks, I'm afraid... rmk? I have no information on that; instruction timings are not defined at architecture level (architecture reference manual), nor do I find information in the CPU technical reference manual (which would be specific to the CPU). Instruction timings tend to be implementation dependent. I've always consulted Will Deacon when I've needed to know whether an instruction is expensive or not. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 10.2Mbps down 587kbps up