From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F24EE49A5 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:16:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241752AbjHXRQX (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2023 13:16:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56300 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241804AbjHXRQK (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Aug 2023 13:16:10 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06F9519A3 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:16:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91CBB61B11 for ; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:16:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6A6FC433C8; Thu, 24 Aug 2023 17:16:07 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1692897368; bh=U4v61CkwKkwUVj4hASXbX+BoMK/zt/yEtGA16p2OJDo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=F4m5FjhKBmOJn/aHzvb6h1mW7xf1LxrA+b6d2tjsgh2i0rRdezDabagYn9YuqAmS8 +YvNwYTWda576MUYg9sRyx7dFzdib/w+ht7k7KxwexBtQuS/5YaOhxsLn0pGWW2Gw1 pqpU4qtlUXim+TYSutCdAf1vlilHTQuSndne91vo= From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , patches@lists.linux.dev, Geert Uytterhoeven , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Arnd Bergmann , Tony Lindgren , Ulf Hansson , Sasha Levin Subject: [PATCH 5.10 014/135] iopoll: Call cpu_relax() in busy loops Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 19:08:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20230824170617.735155415@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.42.0 In-Reply-To: <20230824170617.074557800@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20230824170617.074557800@linuxfoundation.org> User-Agent: quilt/0.67 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org 5.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Geert Uytterhoeven [ Upstream commit b407460ee99033503993ac7437d593451fcdfe44 ] It is considered good practice to call cpu_relax() in busy loops, see Documentation/process/volatile-considered-harmful.rst. This can not only lower CPU power consumption or yield to a hyperthreaded twin processor, but also allows an architecture to mitigate hardware issues (e.g. ARM Erratum 754327 for Cortex-A9 prior to r2p0) in the architecture-specific cpu_relax() implementation. In addition, cpu_relax() is also a compiler barrier. It is not immediately obvious that the @op argument "function" will result in an actual function call (e.g. in case of inlining). Where a function call is a C sequence point, this is lost on inlining. Therefore, with agressive enough optimization it might be possible for the compiler to hoist the: (val) = op(args); "load" out of the loop because it doesn't see the value changing. The addition of cpu_relax() would inhibit this. As the iopoll helpers lack calls to cpu_relax(), people are sometimes reluctant to use them, and may fall back to open-coded polling loops (including cpu_relax() calls) instead. Fix this by adding calls to cpu_relax() to the iopoll helpers: - For the non-atomic case, it is sufficient to call cpu_relax() in case of a zero sleep-between-reads value, as a call to usleep_range() is a safe barrier otherwise. However, it doesn't hurt to add the call regardless, for simplicity, and for similarity with the atomic case below. - For the atomic case, cpu_relax() must be called regardless of the sleep-between-reads value, as there is no guarantee all architecture-specific implementations of udelay() handle this. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann Reviewed-by: Tony Lindgren Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/45c87bec3397fdd704376807f0eec5cc71be440f.1685692810.git.geert+renesas@glider.be Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- include/linux/iopoll.h | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/include/linux/iopoll.h b/include/linux/iopoll.h index 2c8860e406bd8..0417360a6db9b 100644 --- a/include/linux/iopoll.h +++ b/include/linux/iopoll.h @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ } \ if (__sleep_us) \ usleep_range((__sleep_us >> 2) + 1, __sleep_us); \ + cpu_relax(); \ } \ (cond) ? 0 : -ETIMEDOUT; \ }) @@ -95,6 +96,7 @@ } \ if (__delay_us) \ udelay(__delay_us); \ + cpu_relax(); \ } \ (cond) ? 0 : -ETIMEDOUT; \ }) -- 2.40.1