From: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, "Dev Jain" <dev.jain@arm.com>,
Linu Cherian <Linu.Cherian@arm.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/13] arm64: mm: More flags for __flush_tlb_range()
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2026 09:57:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260303095718.00001320@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260302135602.3716920-12-ryan.roberts@arm.com>
On Mon, 2 Mar 2026 13:55:58 +0000
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com> wrote:
> Refactor function variants with "_nosync", "_local" and "_nonotify" into
> a single __always_inline implementation that takes flags and rely on
> constant folding to select the parts that are actually needed at any
> given callsite, based on the provided flags.
>
> Flags all live in the tlbf_t (TLB flags) type; TLBF_NONE (0) continues
> to provide the strongest semantics (i.e. evict from walk cache,
> broadcast, synchronise and notify). Each flag reduces the strength in
> some way; TLBF_NONOTIFY, TLBF_NOSYNC and TLBF_NOBROADCAST are added to
> complement the existing TLBF_NOWALKCACHE.
>
> There are no users that require TLBF_NOBROADCAST without
> TLBF_NOWALKCACHE so implement that as BUILD_BUG() to avoid needing to
> introduce dead code for vae1 invalidations.
>
> The result is a clearer, simpler, more powerful API.
Hi Ryan,
There is one subtle change to rounding that should be called out at least.
Might even be worth pulling it to a precursor patch where you can add an
explanation of why original code was rounding to a larger value than was
ever needed.
Jonathan
>
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
> static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> @@ -586,24 +615,9 @@ static inline void __flush_tlb_range(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long stride, int tlb_level,
> tlbf_t flags)
> {
> - __flush_tlb_range_nosync(vma->vm_mm, start, end, stride,
> - tlb_level, flags);
> - __tlbi_sync_s1ish();
> -}
> -
> -static inline void local_flush_tlb_contpte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> - unsigned long addr)
> -{
> - unsigned long asid;
> -
> - addr = round_down(addr, CONT_PTE_SIZE);
See below.
> -
> - dsb(nshst);
> - asid = ASID(vma->vm_mm);
> - __flush_s1_tlb_range_op(vale1, addr, CONT_PTES, PAGE_SIZE, asid, 3);
> - mmu_notifier_arch_invalidate_secondary_tlbs(vma->vm_mm, addr,
> - addr + CONT_PTE_SIZE);
> - dsb(nsh);
> + start = round_down(start, stride);
See below.
> + end = round_up(end, stride);
> + __do_flush_tlb_range(vma, start, end, stride, tlb_level, flags);
> }
>
> static inline bool __pte_flags_need_flush(ptdesc_t oldval, ptdesc_t newval)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> index 681f22fac52a1..3f1a3e86353de 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/contpte.c
...
> @@ -641,7 +641,10 @@ int contpte_ptep_set_access_flags(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> __ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr, ptep, entry, 0);
>
> if (dirty)
> - local_flush_tlb_contpte(vma, start_addr);
> + __flush_tlb_range(vma, start_addr,
> + start_addr + CONT_PTE_SIZE,
> + PAGE_SIZE, 3,
This results in a different stride to round down.
local_flush_tlb_contpte() did
addr = round_down(addr, CONT_PTE_SIZE);
With this call we have
start = round_down(start, stride); where stride is PAGE_SIZE.
I'm too lazy to figure out if that matters.
> + TLBF_NOWALKCACHE | TLBF_NOBROADCAST);
> } else {
> __contpte_try_unfold(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, orig_pte);
> __ptep_set_access_flags(vma, addr, ptep, entry, dirty);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-03 10:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-02 13:55 [PATCH v3 00/13] arm64: Refactor TLB invalidation API and implementation Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 01/13] arm64: mm: Re-implement the __tlbi_level macro as a C function Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 02/13] arm64: mm: Introduce a C wrapper for by-range TLB invalidation Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 03/13] arm64: mm: Implicitly invalidate user ASID based on TLBI operation Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 04/13] arm64: mm: Push __TLBI_VADDR() into __tlbi_level() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 05/13] arm64: mm: Inline __TLBI_VADDR_RANGE() into __tlbi_range() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 06/13] arm64: mm: Re-implement the __flush_tlb_range_op macro in C Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 07/13] arm64: mm: Simplify __TLBI_RANGE_NUM() macro Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 08/13] arm64: mm: Simplify __flush_tlb_range_limit_excess() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 09/13] arm64: mm: Refactor flush_tlb_page() to use __tlbi_level_asid() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 10/13] arm64: mm: Refactor __flush_tlb_range() to take flags Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 11/13] arm64: mm: More flags for __flush_tlb_range() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-03 9:57 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2026-03-03 13:54 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-03-03 17:34 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-03-02 13:55 ` [PATCH v3 12/13] arm64: mm: Wrap flush_tlb_page() around __do_flush_tlb_range() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-03 9:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-03-02 13:56 ` [PATCH v3 13/13] arm64: mm: Provide level hint for flush_tlb_page() Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 14:42 ` Mark Rutland
2026-03-02 17:39 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-03-02 17:56 ` Mark Rutland
2026-03-13 19:43 ` [PATCH v3 00/13] arm64: Refactor TLB invalidation API and implementation Catalin Marinas
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=20260303095718.00001320@huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=Linu.Cherian@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will@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