From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfio: Fix endianness handling for emulated BARs
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:22:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53A97BA9.4020702@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53A976B7.3070709@ozlabs.ru>
On 24.06.14 15:01, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> On 06/24/2014 10:52 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> On 24.06.14 14:50, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>> On 06/24/2014 08:41 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>>> On 24.06.14 12:11, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>>>> On 06/21/2014 09:12 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 21:21 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Working on big endian being an accident may be a matter of perspective
>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The comment remains that this patch doesn't actually fix anything except
>>>>>>> the overhead on big endian systems doing redundant byte swapping and
>>>>>>> maybe the philosophy that vfio regions are little endian.
>>>>>> Yes, that works by accident because technically VFIO is a transport and
>>>>>> thus shouldn't perform any endian swapping of any sort, which remains
>>>>>> the responsibility of the end driver which is the only one to know
>>>>>> whether a given BAR location is a a register or some streaming data
>>>>>> and in the former case whether it's LE or BE (some PCI devices are BE
>>>>>> even ! :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But yes, in the end, it works with the dual "cancelling" swaps and the
>>>>>> overhead of those swaps is probably drowned in the noise of the syscall
>>>>>> overhead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm still not a fan of iowrite vs iowritebe, there must be something we
>>>>>>> can use that doesn't have an implicit swap.
>>>>>> Sadly there isn't ... In the old day we didn't even have the "be"
>>>>>> variant and readl/writel style accessors still don't have them either
>>>>>> for all archs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is __raw_readl/writel but here the semantics are much more than
>>>>>> just "don't swap", they also don't have memory barriers (which means
>>>>>> they are essentially useless to most drivers unless those are platform
>>>>>> specific drivers which know exactly what they are doing, or in the rare
>>>>>> cases such as accessing a framebuffer which we know never have side
>>>>>> effects).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Calling it iowrite*_native is also an abuse of the namespace.
>>>>>>> Next thing we know some common code
>>>>>>> will legitimately use that name.
>>>>>> I might make sense to those definitions into a common header. There have
>>>>>> been a handful of cases in the past that wanted that sort of "native
>>>>>> byte order" MMIOs iirc (though don't ask me for examples, I can't really
>>>>>> remember).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we do need to define an alias
>>>>>>> (which I'd like to avoid) it should be something like vfio_iowrite32.
>>>>> Ping?
>>>>>
>>>>> We need to make a decision whether to move those xxx_native() helpers
>>>>> somewhere (where?) or leave the patch as is (as we figured out that
>>>>> iowriteXX functions implement barriers and we cannot just use raw
>>>>> accessors) and fix commit log to explain everything.
>>>> Is there actually any difference in generated code with this patch applied
>>>> and without? I would hope that iowrite..() is inlined and cancels out the
>>>> cpu_to_le..() calls that are also inlined?
>>> iowrite32 is a non-inline function so conversions take place so are the
>>> others. And sorry but I fail to see why this matters. We are not trying to
>>> accelerate things, we are removing redundant operations which confuse
>>> people who read the code.
>> The confusion depends on where you're coming from. If you happen to know
>> that "iowrite32" writes in LE, then the LE conversion makes a lot of sense.
> It was like this (and this is just confusing):
>
> iowrite32(le32_to_cpu(val), io + off);
>
> What would make sense (according to you and I would understand this) is this:
>
> iowrite32(cpu_to_le32(val), io + off);
>
>
> Or I missed your point, did I?
No, you didn't miss it. I think for people who know how iowrite32()
works the above is obvious. I find the fact that iowrite32() writes in
LE always pretty scary though ;).
So IMHO we should either create new, generic iowrite helpers that don't
do any endian swapping at all or do iowrite32(cpu_to_le32(val)) calls.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-24 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-18 11:36 [PATCH] vfio: Fix endianness handling for emulated BARs Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-18 18:35 ` Alex Williamson
2014-06-19 0:50 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-19 1:50 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-19 1:50 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-19 3:48 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-19 5:30 ` Bharat.Bhushan
2014-06-19 6:17 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-20 3:21 ` Alex Williamson
2014-06-20 14:14 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-20 23:16 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-20 23:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-24 10:11 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-24 10:41 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-24 12:50 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-24 12:52 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-24 13:01 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-24 13:22 ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2014-06-24 14:21 ` Alex Williamson
2014-06-24 14:33 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-24 14:40 ` David Laight
2014-06-24 14:43 ` Alex Williamson
2014-06-24 16:26 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-24 21:54 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-06-25 2:43 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2014-06-24 21:46 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=53A97BA9.4020702@suse.de \
--to=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.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).