From: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
To: Beata Michalska <beata.michalska@linaro.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, quintela@redhat.com,
dgilbert@redhat.com, shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com,
eric.auger@redhat.com, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/4] target/arm: Add support for DC CVAP & DC CVADP ins
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 10:22:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c70f7562-c988-5eab-fa1e-fc8b5897e171@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190910095610.4546-5-beata.michalska@linaro.org>
On 9/10/19 2:56 AM, Beata Michalska wrote:
> @@ -2229,7 +2229,8 @@ static inline uint64_t cpreg_to_kvm_id(uint32_t cpregid)
> #define ARM_CP_NZCV (ARM_CP_SPECIAL | 0x0300)
> #define ARM_CP_CURRENTEL (ARM_CP_SPECIAL | 0x0400)
> #define ARM_CP_DC_ZVA (ARM_CP_SPECIAL | 0x0500)
> -#define ARM_LAST_SPECIAL ARM_CP_DC_ZVA
> +#define ARM_CP_DC_CVAP (ARM_CP_SPECIAL | 0x0600)
> +#define ARM_LAST_SPECIAL ARM_CP_DC_CVAP
I don't see that this operation needs to be handled via "special". It's a
function call upon write, as for many other system registers.
> +static inline bool isar_feature_aa64_dcpop(const ARMISARegisters *id)
> +{
> + return FIELD_EX64(id->id_aa64isar1, ID_AA64ISAR1, DPB) != 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool isar_feature_aa64_dcpodp(const ARMISARegisters *id)
> +{
> + return (FIELD_EX64(id->id_aa64isar1, ID_AA64ISAR1, DPB) >> 1) != 0;
> +}
The correct check is FIELD_EX(...) >= 2. This is a 4-bit field, as with all of
the others.
> +static CPAccessResult aa64_cacheop_persist_access(CPUARMState *env,
> + const ARMCPRegInfo *ri,
> + bool isread)
> +{
> + ARMCPU *cpu = env_archcpu(env);
> + /*
> + * Access is UNDEF if lacking implementation for either DC CVAP or DC CVADP
> + * DC CVAP -> CRm: 0xc
> + * DC CVADP -> CRm: 0xd
> + */
> + return (ri->crm == 0xc && !cpu_isar_feature(aa64_dcpop, cpu)) ||
> + (ri->crm == 0xd && !cpu_isar_feature(aa64_dcpodp, cpu))
> + ? CP_ACCESS_TRAP_UNCATEGORIZED
> + : aa64_cacheop_access(env, ri, isread);
> +}
...
> + { .name = "DC_CVAP", .state = ARM_CP_STATE_AA64,
> + .opc0 = 1, .opc1 = 3, .crn = 7, .crm = 12, .opc2 = 1,
> + .access = PL0_W, .type = ARM_CP_DC_CVAP,
> + .accessfn = aa64_cacheop_persist_access },
> + { .name = "DC_CVADP", .state = ARM_CP_STATE_AA64,
> + .opc0 = 1, .opc1 = 3, .crn = 7, .crm = 13, .opc2 = 1,
> + .access = PL0_W, .type = ARM_CP_DC_CVAP,
> + .accessfn = aa64_cacheop_persist_access },
While this access function works, it's better to simply not register these at
all when they're not supported. Compare the registration of rndr_reginfo.
As I described above, I think this can use a normal write function. In which
case this would use .type = ARM_CP_NO_RAW | ARM_CP_SUPPRESS_TB_END.
(I believe that ARM_CP_IO is not required, but I'm not 100% sure. Certainly
there does not seem to be anything in dc_cvap() that affects state which can
queried from another virtual cpu, so there does not appear to be any reason to
grab the global i/o lock. The host kernel should be just fine with concurrent
msync syscalls, or whatever it is that libpmem uses.)
> +void HELPER(dc_cvap)(CPUARMState *env, uint64_t vaddr_in)
> +{
> +#ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> + ARMCPU *cpu = env_archcpu(env);
> + /* CTR_EL0 System register -> DminLine, bits [19:16] */
> + uint64_t dline_size = 4 << ((cpu->ctr >> 16) & 0xF);
> + uint64_t vaddr = vaddr_in & ~(dline_size - 1);
> + void *haddr;
> + int mem_idx = cpu_mmu_index(env, false);
> +
> + /* This won't be crossing page boundaries */
> + haddr = probe_read(env, vaddr, dline_size, mem_idx, GETPC());
> + if (haddr) {
> +
> + ram_addr_t offset;
> + MemoryRegion *mr;
> +
> + /*
> + * RCU critical section + ref counting,
> + * so that MR won't disappear behind the scene
> + */
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + mr = memory_region_from_host(haddr, &offset);
> + if (mr) {
> + memory_region_ref(mr);
> + }
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> +
> + if (mr) {
> + memory_region_do_writeback(mr, offset, dline_size);
> + memory_region_unref(mr);
> + }
> + }
> +#endif
We hold the rcu lock whenever a TB is executing. I don't believe there's any
point in increasing the lock count here. Similarly with memory_region
refcounts -- they cannot vanish while we're executing a TB.
Thus I believe that about half of this function can fold away.
r~
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-09-24 17:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-10 9:56 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] target/arm: Support for Data Cache Clean up to PoP Beata Michalska
2019-09-10 9:56 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/4] tcg: cputlb: Add probe_read Beata Michalska
2019-09-23 23:54 ` Alex Bennée
2019-09-10 9:56 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/4] Memory: Enable writeback for given memory region Beata Michalska
2019-09-24 0:00 ` Alex Bennée
2019-10-09 11:40 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-24 16:28 ` Richard Henderson
2019-10-09 11:44 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-24 16:30 ` Richard Henderson
2019-10-09 11:45 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-10 9:56 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] migration: ram: Switch to ram block writeback Beata Michalska
2019-09-10 10:26 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-09-10 11:28 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-10 13:16 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-09-10 14:21 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-11 10:36 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-09-12 9:10 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-24 16:30 ` Richard Henderson
2019-09-10 9:56 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/4] target/arm: Add support for DC CVAP & DC CVADP ins Beata Michalska
2019-09-23 23:54 ` Alex Bennée
2019-10-09 11:47 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-24 1:16 ` Alex Bennée
2019-10-09 11:49 ` Beata Michalska
2019-09-24 17:22 ` Richard Henderson [this message]
2019-10-09 11:53 ` Beata Michalska
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=c70f7562-c988-5eab-fa1e-fc8b5897e171@linaro.org \
--to=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=beata.michalska@linaro.org \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
--cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).