[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220815173725.ph6ogtqneiqwqek7@box.shutemov.name>
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2022 20:37:25 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Kostya Serebryany <kcc@...gle.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...il.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Taras Madan <tarasmadan@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
"H . J . Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 04/11] x86/mm: Handle LAM on context switch
On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 03:42:25PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 07:17:56AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > index c1e31e9a85d7..fdc0b69b5da7 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> > @@ -154,17 +154,18 @@ static inline u16 user_pcid(u16 asid)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static inline unsigned long build_cr3(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid)
> > +static inline unsigned long build_cr3(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid, unsigned long lam)
> > {
> > if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PCID)) {
> > - return __sme_pa(pgd) | kern_pcid(asid);
> > + return __sme_pa(pgd) | kern_pcid(asid) | lam;
> > } else {
> > VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(asid != 0);
> > - return __sme_pa(pgd);
> > + return __sme_pa(pgd) | lam;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -static inline unsigned long build_cr3_noflush(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid)
> > +static inline unsigned long build_cr3_noflush(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid,
> > + unsigned long lam)
> > {
> > VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(asid > MAX_ASID_AVAILABLE);
> > /*
> > @@ -173,7 +174,7 @@ static inline unsigned long build_cr3_noflush(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid)
> > * boot because all CPU's the have same capabilities:
> > */
> > VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PCID));
> > - return __sme_pa(pgd) | kern_pcid(asid) | CR3_NOFLUSH;
> > + return __sme_pa(pgd) | kern_pcid(asid) | lam | CR3_NOFLUSH;
> > }
>
> Looking at this; I wonder if we want something like this:
>
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
> @@ -157,6 +157,7 @@ static inline u16 user_pcid(u16 asid)
> static inline unsigned long build_cr3(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid, unsigned long lam)
> {
> if (static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PCID)) {
> + VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(asid > MAX_ASID_AVAILABLE);
> return __sme_pa(pgd) | kern_pcid(asid) | lam;
> } else {
> VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(asid != 0);
> @@ -167,14 +168,13 @@ static inline unsigned long build_cr3(pg
> static inline unsigned long build_cr3_noflush(pgd_t *pgd, u16 asid,
> unsigned long lam)
> {
> - VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(asid > MAX_ASID_AVAILABLE);
> /*
> * Use boot_cpu_has() instead of this_cpu_has() as this function
> * might be called during early boot. This should work even after
> * boot because all CPU's the have same capabilities:
> */
> VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PCID));
> - return __sme_pa(pgd) | kern_pcid(asid) | lam | CR3_NOFLUSH;
> + return build_cr3(pgd, asid, lam) | CR3_NOFLUSH;
> }
Looks sane, but seems unrelated to the patch. Is it okay to fold it
anyway?
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists