The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, ada.coupriediaz@arm.com,
	ardb@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, hca@linux.ibm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org,
	ruanjinjie@huawei.com, vladimir.murzin@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	yang@os.amperecomputing.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/13] arm64: percpu: Add infrastructure for preemptible this_cpu_*() ops
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 18:49:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260728164947.GL651302@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <amjS7WOS6psNTXbf@J2N7QTR9R3>

On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 05:03:57PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 04:30:16PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 04:19:58PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 01:38:52PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > 
> > > > With the scheme added in this patch, this can be compiled as:
> > > > 
> > > > | <outline_this_cpu_add_u64>:
> > > > |        mrs     x2, sp_el0
> > > > |        mov     x4, #0xc80
> > > > |        strh    w4, [x2, #20]
> > > > |        mrs     x4, tpidr_el1
> > > > |        add     x3, x0, x4
> > > 
> > > Which it then recomputes, and so is harmless.
> > 
> > Here!
> > 
> > > > | 1:     ldxr    x6, [x3]
> > > > |        add     x6, x6, x1
> > > > |        stxr    w5, x6, [x3]
> > > > |        cbnz    w5, 1b
> > > 
> > > If we get here and interrupts happens, we recompute pointlessly, no harm
> > > done.
> > > 
> > > Anyway, per this sequence there is no point in ever doing the fixup. So
> > > perhaps give a better example?
> > 
> > Nevermind, brain just wasn't working right, when interrupt happens at
> > 'Here!' above, it needs the fixup, irrespective of the atomic type.
> 
> Yep!
> 
> Note that the atomic type doesn't change things. We need the fixup even
> if preemption happens *within* the LDXR...STXR loop, since the inline
> sequences branches back to the LDXR, *without* recalculating the addr or
> offset, and the fixup *does not* alter the PC.
> 
> It's a bit awkaward to spell that out in the commit message without
> unrolling the loop :/

Fair enough.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-28 16:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-28 12:38 [RFC PATCH 00/13] arm64: Preemptible this_cpu_*() operations Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 01/13] arm64: preempt: Simplify and optimize __preempt_count_dec_and_test() Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 02/13] arm64: preempt: Treat should_resched() as unlikely Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 03/13] arm64: ptrace: Always inline pt_regs_[read,write}_reg() Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 04/13] arm64: percpu: Factor out percpu offset asm Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 05/13] arm64: gpr-num: Add wxN aliases for wN registers Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 06/13] arm64: percpu: Add infrastructure for preemptible this_cpu_*() ops Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 14:19   ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-07-28 14:30     ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-07-28 16:03       ` Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 16:49         ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-07-28 15:53     ` Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 16:46       ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-07-28 16:49       ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-07-28 16:51   ` Heiko Carstens
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 07/13] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible read/write ops Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 08/13] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible void RMW ops Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 09/13] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible return " Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 10/13] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible XCHG ops Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 11/13] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible CMPXCHG ops Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 12/13] arm64: percpu: Implement preemptible CMPXCHG128 ops Mark Rutland
2026-07-28 12:38 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] arm64: percpu: Remove _pcp_protect*() wrappers Mark Rutland

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=20260728164947.GL651302@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ada.coupriediaz@arm.com \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=ruanjinjie@huawei.com \
    --cc=vladimir.murzin@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.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