From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F2C235C44 for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 16:19:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734020386; cv=none; b=SO9uOwxt1NITZaFztXZj1bzOssnOwwHDfLa13gNtU7lc+UyqHqqHh9OMxCdX6C0fK98Bq25OGC+6w0mpzsPuwJ/c01Kf7i7P6E8WegvwXizGHkgFFCfn4UfCcOmtLdJGtchLoSwElPUN7LUJcAanYSSRm4CfNAkgoSbWgM058X4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734020386; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mCjVRaUeMZwfKMlo533tZ3U6yzdL1+NpzLgqAGNejlg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XBDeBeQeZaZGccepS6laEJ9pCXxufdiWa+8R+WX15isQiXQTdBkdZwHyKdY4FSvsjdl/QCP3NJ5tRFS0/UpGRv75Yo88S7qMJP+SJR6FHYOHdeyDhSx0VgAkuzA2EI6Xp9tBASZ+bklr5jXQc8o5k8eKOYEpYAI7aW27/j2SAms= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4F71762; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:20:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from e133380.arm.com (e133380.arm.com [10.1.197.41]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 19C013F720; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 08:19:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 16:19:40 +0000 From: Dave Martin To: Zeng Heng Cc: james.morse@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, xiexiuqi@huawei.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH mpam mpam/snapshot/v6.12-rc1 v3 5/5] arm_mpam: Adapting the closid/rmid matching determination functions Message-ID: References: <20241207092136.2488426-1-zengheng4@huawei.com> <20241207092136.2488426-6-zengheng4@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20241207092136.2488426-6-zengheng4@huawei.com> Hi, On Sat, Dec 07, 2024 at 05:21:36PM +0800, Zeng Heng wrote: > According to the previous patches, add the inverse functions for the > closid/rmid conversion functions to serve as the conversion functions for > reqpartid/pmg. And adapt the matching determination functions > resctrl_arch_match_closid() and resctrl_arch_match_rmid() by the inverse > functions. > > For the same reason, when updating the (req)PARTID/PMG pair for a task, > the new conversion functions also are used for adaptation. > > Signed-off-by: Zeng Heng > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h | 6 ++- > drivers/platform/arm64/mpam/mpam_resctrl.c | 63 +++++++++++++++------- > 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h > index e5f385767174..9fc095530671 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/mpam.h > @@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ static inline u64 mpam_get_regval(struct task_struct *tsk) > #endif > } > > +u32 rmid2pmg(u32 rmid); > + > static inline void resctrl_arch_set_rmid(struct task_struct *tsk, u32 rmid) > { > #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_MPAM > @@ -100,8 +102,8 @@ static inline void resctrl_arch_set_rmid(struct task_struct *tsk, u32 rmid) > > regval &= ~MPAM1_EL1_PMG_D; > regval &= ~MPAM1_EL1_PMG_I; > - regval |= FIELD_PREP(MPAM1_EL1_PMG_D, rmid); > - regval |= FIELD_PREP(MPAM1_EL1_PMG_I, rmid); > + regval |= FIELD_PREP(MPAM1_EL1_PMG_D, rmid2pmg(rmid)); > + regval |= FIELD_PREP(MPAM1_EL1_PMG_I, rmid2pmg(rmid)); Note, this function does not seem to be used; I added a patch in my series [1] to get rid of it instead of converting it. > > WRITE_ONCE(task_thread_info(tsk)->mpam_partid_pmg, regval); > #endif > diff --git a/drivers/platform/arm64/mpam/mpam_resctrl.c b/drivers/platform/arm64/mpam/mpam_resctrl.c [...] > void resctrl_arch_set_cpu_default_closid_rmid(int cpu, u32 closid, u32 rmid) > { > - BUG_ON(closid > U16_MAX); > - BUG_ON(rmid > U8_MAX); > + u32 reqpartid = closid_rmid2reqpartid(closid, rmid); > + u32 pmg = rmid2pmg(rmid); > + u32 partid_d, partid_i; > + > + BUG_ON(reqpartid > U16_MAX); > + BUG_ON(pmg > U8_MAX); > > if (!cdp_enabled) { > - mpam_set_cpu_defaults(cpu, closid, closid, rmid, rmid); > + mpam_set_cpu_defaults(cpu, reqpartid, reqpartid, pmg, pmg); > } else { > /* > * When CDP is enabled, resctrl halves the closid range and we > * use odd/even partid for one closid. > */ > - u32 partid_d = resctrl_get_config_index(closid, CDP_DATA); > - u32 partid_i = resctrl_get_config_index(closid, CDP_CODE); > + partid_d = resctrl_get_config_index(reqpartid, CDP_DATA); > + partid_i = resctrl_get_config_index(reqpartid, CDP_CODE); > > - mpam_set_cpu_defaults(cpu, partid_d, partid_i, rmid, rmid); > + mpam_set_cpu_defaults(cpu, partid_d, partid_i, pmg, pmg); Prior to this patch, will the PARTID and/or PMG programmed for a control group be different from the PARTID and/or PMG used to program the MSCs? If so, those changes probably need to be in the same patch. [...] > @@ -289,41 +307,46 @@ void resctrl_arch_sync_cpu_closid_rmid(void *info) [...] > /* The task's pmg is not unique, the partid must be considered too */ > bool resctrl_arch_match_rmid(struct task_struct *tsk, u32 closid, u32 rmid) > { > u64 regval = mpam_get_regval(tsk); > - u32 tsk_closid = FIELD_GET(MPAM1_EL1_PARTID_D, regval); > - u32 tsk_rmid = FIELD_GET(MPAM1_EL1_PMG_D, regval); > + u32 tsk_pmg = FIELD_GET(MPAM1_EL1_PMG_D, regval); > + u32 tsk_partid = FIELD_GET(MPAM1_EL1_PARTID_D, regval); > > if (cdp_enabled) > - tsk_closid >>= 1; > + tsk_partid >>= 1; > > - return (tsk_closid == closid) && (tsk_rmid == rmid); > + return (reqpartid2closid(tsk_partid) == closid) && > + (reqpartid_pmg2rmid(tsk_partid, tsk_pmg) == rmid); Do we actually need the reverse mappings here? It doesn't really matter which ID namespace is used for the comparison, so in my version of this I converted the passed-in closid and rmid to PARTID / PMG form and then compared those with tsk's values. (But if I've missed some subtlety here, please let me know!) [...] Cheers ---Dave [1] [RFC PATCH 3/6] arm_mpam: Delete unused function resctrl_arch_set_rmid() https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241212154000.330467-4-Dave.Martin@arm.com/