Re: [PATCH v4 10/16] cputlb: Partially inline memory_region_section_get_iotlb

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

On 24.09.19 00:59, Richard Henderson wrote:
> There is only one caller, tlb_set_page_with_attrs.  We cannot
> inline the entire function because the AddressSpaceDispatch
> structure is private to exec.c, and cannot easily be moved to
> include/exec/memory-internal.h.
> 
> Compute is_ram and is_romd once within tlb_set_page_with_attrs.
> Fold the number of tests against these predicates.  Compute
> cpu_physical_memory_is_clean outside of the tlb lock region.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> ---
>  include/exec/exec-all.h |  6 +---
>  accel/tcg/cputlb.c      | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>  exec.c                  | 22 ++-----------
>  3 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/exec/exec-all.h b/include/exec/exec-all.h
> index 81b02eb2fe..49db07ba0b 100644
> --- a/include/exec/exec-all.h
> +++ b/include/exec/exec-all.h
> @@ -509,11 +509,7 @@ address_space_translate_for_iotlb(CPUState *cpu, int asidx, hwaddr addr,
>                                    hwaddr *xlat, hwaddr *plen,
>                                    MemTxAttrs attrs, int *prot);
>  hwaddr memory_region_section_get_iotlb(CPUState *cpu,
> -                                       MemoryRegionSection *section,
> -                                       target_ulong vaddr,
> -                                       hwaddr paddr, hwaddr xlat,
> -                                       int prot,
> -                                       target_ulong *address);
> +                                       MemoryRegionSection *section);
>  #endif
>  
>  /* vl.c */
> diff --git a/accel/tcg/cputlb.c b/accel/tcg/cputlb.c
> index 05212ff244..05530a8b0c 100644
> --- a/accel/tcg/cputlb.c
> +++ b/accel/tcg/cputlb.c
> @@ -704,13 +704,14 @@ void tlb_set_page_with_attrs(CPUState *cpu, target_ulong vaddr,
>      MemoryRegionSection *section;
>      unsigned int index;
>      target_ulong address;
> -    target_ulong code_address;
> +    target_ulong write_address;
>      uintptr_t addend;
>      CPUTLBEntry *te, tn;
>      hwaddr iotlb, xlat, sz, paddr_page;
>      target_ulong vaddr_page;
>      int asidx = cpu_asidx_from_attrs(cpu, attrs);
>      int wp_flags;
> +    bool is_ram, is_romd;
>  
>      assert_cpu_is_self(cpu);
>  
> @@ -739,18 +740,46 @@ void tlb_set_page_with_attrs(CPUState *cpu, target_ulong vaddr,
>      if (attrs.byte_swap) {
>          address |= TLB_BSWAP;
>      }
> -    if (!memory_region_is_ram(section->mr) &&
> -        !memory_region_is_romd(section->mr)) {
> -        /* IO memory case */
> -        address |= TLB_MMIO;
> -        addend = 0;
> -    } else {
> +
> +    is_ram = memory_region_is_ram(section->mr);
> +    is_romd = memory_region_is_romd(section->mr);
> +
> +    if (is_ram || is_romd) {
> +        /* RAM and ROMD both have associated host memory. */
>          addend = (uintptr_t)memory_region_get_ram_ptr(section->mr) + xlat;
> +    } else {
> +        /* I/O does not; force the host address to NULL. */
> +        addend = 0;
> +    }
> +
> +    write_address = address;

I guess the only "suboptimal" change is that you now have two checks for
"prot & PAGE_WRITE" twice in the case of ram instead of one.

> +    if (is_ram) {
> +        iotlb = memory_region_get_ram_addr(section->mr) + xlat;
> +        /*
> +         * Computing is_clean is expensive; avoid all that unless
> +         * the page is actually writable.
> +         */
> +        if (prot & PAGE_WRITE) {
> +            if (section->readonly) {
> +                write_address |= TLB_ROM;
> +            } else if (cpu_physical_memory_is_clean(iotlb)) {
> +                write_address |= TLB_NOTDIRTY;
> +            }
> +        }
> +    } else {
> +        /* I/O or ROMD */
> +        iotlb = memory_region_section_get_iotlb(cpu, section) + xlat;
> +        /*
> +         * Writes to romd devices must go through MMIO to enable write.
> +         * Reads to romd devices go through the ram_ptr found above,
> +         * but of course reads to I/O must go through MMIO.
> +         */
> +        write_address |= TLB_MMIO;

... and here you calculate write_address even if probably unused.

Can your move the calculation of the write_address completely into the
"prot & PAGE_WRITE" case below?

(I'm not looking at the full code, so could as well be that I am missing
something :) )


-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb