[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <16e9b436-5919-39df-3f1a-a717d4229651@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2020 10:18:13 +0530
From: Gaurav Kohli <gkohli@...eaurora.org>
To: will@...nel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
maz@...nel.org, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
neeraju@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Skip apply SSBS call for non SSBS system
Hi,
Please let us know, is below patch good to have
or not for non ssbs systems.
On 8/4/2020 7:44 PM, Gaurav Kohli wrote:
> In a system where no cpu's implement SSBS, for
> them no need to set pstate. This might help to save
> few cpu cycles during context switch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gaurav Kohli <gkohli@...eaurora.org>
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> index 6089638..79f80f1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/process.c
> @@ -477,6 +477,13 @@ static void ssbs_thread_switch(struct task_struct *next)
> struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs(next);
>
> /*
> + * For Targets which don't have SSBS support, they
> + * can return from here.
> + */
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_SSBD))
> + return;
> +
> + /*
> * Nothing to do for kernel threads, but 'regs' may be junk
> * (e.g. idle task) so check the flags and bail early.
> */
>
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center,
Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists