From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, andreas.herrmann3@amd.com,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86, cacheinfo: Fix disabling of L3 cache indexes
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:30:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100121163048.GB10321@aftab> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B578C0E.5090709@zytor.com>
On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 03:04:46PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 01/19/2010 03:07 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >
> > +static void __wbinvd(void *dummy)
> > +{
> > + asm volatile("wbinvd" : : : "memory");
> > +}
> > +
>
> [...]
>
> > + smp_call_function_single(cpu, __wbinvd, NULL, 1);
>
> I really don't like this combination.
>
> First of all, it's an asm version of an instruction we already have
> macros for. This should probably just be wbinvd(), or *possibly*
> native_wbinvd(), although that would have to be justified -- especially
> since the preexisting code used wbinvd().
The preexisting code using wbinvd is a bug since wbinvd has to happen on
a core which contains the L3 cache whose indices(!) we disable.
But yeah, a wbinvd smp version is a bit problematic since
smp_call_function_* expects a function pointer which has a void *
argument but native_wbinvd() has no args. By the way, there's a similar
thing in <drivers/char/agp/intel-agp.c::do_wbinvd()>
> Second, it's pretty obvious that the only reason for this function at
> all is to provide a wrapper that can be passed to smp_call_function*().
> It would be a lot cleaner to have a small function wbinvd_on_cpu(cpu)
> as a wrapper for the higher-order functionality.
Done, see my next patch series.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
-
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating Systems Research Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-21 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-19 11:07 [PATCH 0/3] x86, cacheinfo, amd: L3 Cache Index Disable fixes Borislav Petkov
2010-01-19 11:07 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86, cacheinfo: Fix disabling of L3 cache indexes Borislav Petkov
2010-01-20 23:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-21 16:30 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2010-01-21 18:21 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-19 11:07 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86, cacheinfo: Add cache index disable sysfs attrs only to L3 caches Borislav Petkov
2010-01-19 11:07 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86, cacheinfo: Calculate L3 indexes Borislav Petkov
2010-01-20 23:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-01-21 16:31 ` Borislav Petkov
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=20100121163048.GB10321@aftab \
--to=bp@amd64.org \
--cc=andreas.herrmann3@amd.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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