[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240515-wobble-stack-5b9264c12f37@wendy>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 12:51:04 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To: "Wang, Xiao W" <xiao.w.wang@...el.com>
CC: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>, "paul.walmsley@...ive.com"
<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, "palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>,
"aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, "luke.r.nels@...il.com"
<luke.r.nels@...il.com>, "xi.wang@...il.com" <xi.wang@...il.com>,
"bjorn@...nel.org" <bjorn@...nel.org>, "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>, "andrii@...nel.org"
<andrii@...nel.org>, "martin.lau@...ux.dev" <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
"eddyz87@...il.com" <eddyz87@...il.com>, "song@...nel.org" <song@...nel.org>,
"yonghong.song@...ux.dev" <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
"john.fastabend@...il.com" <john.fastabend@...il.com>, "kpsingh@...nel.org"
<kpsingh@...nel.org>, "sdf@...gle.com" <sdf@...gle.com>, "haoluo@...gle.com"
<haoluo@...gle.com>, "jolsa@...nel.org" <jolsa@...nel.org>,
"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, "pulehui@...wei.com"
<pulehui@...wei.com>, "Li, Haicheng" <haicheng.li@...el.com>,
"conor@...nel.org" <conor@...nel.org>, Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] riscv, bpf: Optimize zextw insn with Zba extension
On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 11:31:43AM +0000, Wang, Xiao W wrote:
> > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> > > > My preferences is to remove as much of the TOOLCHAIN_HAS_ stuff as
> > > > possible. We should audit the extensions which have them to see if
> > > > they're really necessary.
> > >
> > > While I think it is reasonable to allow the "RISCV_ISA_ZBB" option to
> > > control whether or not bpf is allowed to use it for optimisations, only
> > > allowing bpf to do that if there's toolchain support feels odd to me..
> > > Maybe we need to sorta steal from Charlie's patchset and introduce
> > > some hidden options that have the toolchain dep that are used by the
> > > alternative macros etc?
> > >
> > > I'll have a poke at how bad that looks I think.
> >
> > I don't love this, in particular my option naming, but it would allow
> > the Zbb optimisations in the kernel to not depend on toolchain support
> > while not muddying the Kconfig waters for users:
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/conor/linux.git/commit/?h=ri
> > scv-zbb_split
>
> In that patch, I think the bpt jit part should check IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB)
> rather than IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_ISA_ZBB_ALT).
D'oh, you're right. The bpf code being different was meant to be the whole
point of the change...
> > A similar model could be followed if there were to be some
> > optimisations for Zba in the future that do require toolchain support:
>
> Though this model introduces extra hidden Kconfig option, it does provide finer
> config granularity. This should be a separate patch in the future, we can discuss about
> the option naming there.
Yeah, not expecting you to do this as part of this patch.
Thanks,
Conor.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists