netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 25/35] nds32: Build infrastructure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEbi=3ddtygoDSYjeXSERkq3OUZRuboVSPQvDvAgrA=LgBBe0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Nov 2017 18:01:22 +0800
From:   Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Greentime <greentime@...estech.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Chen <deanbo422@...il.com>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Chen <vincentc@...estech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 25/35] nds32: Build infrastructure

2017-11-30 17:30 GMT+08:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com> wrote:
>> 2017-11-30 4:27 GMT+08:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
>>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:10 PM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com> wrote:
>>>> 2017-11-29 19:57 GMT+08:00 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>:
>
>>> When you put them in a sorted list like I mentioned for simplicity, you
>>> could reduce the confusion by naming them differently, e.g.
>>> CONFIG_CPU_N10_OR_NEWER.
>>>
>>> Having only the CPU_CACHE_NONALIASING option is fine if you
>>> never need to make any other decisions based on the CPU core
>>> type, but then the help text should describe specifically which cases
>>> are affected (N10/N13/D13 with 4K page size), and you can decide to
>>> hide the option and make it always-on when using 8K page size.
>>>
>>>        Arnd
>>
>>
>> Hi, Arnd:
>>
>> I think I can use this name "CPU_V3" for all nds32 v3 compatible cpu.
>> It will be implemented like this.
>
> I think I'm still a bit confused about the relation between CPU cores
> and architecture levels. Is it correct to say that there are orthogonal,
> and that you can have e.g. an N10 core implementing either nds32v2
> or nds32v3?
>

Yup, we did having N10 cores are implementing either nds32v3 or
nds32v2, but nds32v2 are not used anymore.
We can assume every nds32 cores are v3.

> There is nothing wrong with that of course, it's just not what I
> expected from having worked with other architectures.
>
> I also see that GCC has no pipeline specific optimizations for
> specific cores, it just understands the differences between the
> architecture levels, so at least today there is way to pass e.g.
> "-march=nds32v2 -mtune=d15" to generate code that would
> work on both v2 and v3 but be optimized for d15.

Thanks. We will work on that.

>> config HWZOL
>>         bool "hardware zero overhead loop support"
>>         depends on CPU_D10 || CPU_D15
>>         default n
>>         help
>>           A set of Zero-Overhead Loop mechanism is provided to reduce the
>>           instruction fetch and execution overhead of loop-control instructions.
>>           It will save 3 registers($LB, $LC, $LE) for context saving if say Y.
>>           You don't need to save these registers if you can make sure your user
>>           program doesn't use these registers.
>>
>>           If unsure, say N.
>>
>> config CPU_CACHE_NONALIASING
>>         bool "Non-aliasing cache"
>>         depends on !CPU_N10 && !CPU_D10
>>         default n
>>         help
>>           If this CPU is using VIPT data cache and its cache way size is larger
>>           than page size, say N. If it is using PIPT data cache, say Y.
>>
>>           If unsure, say N.
>
> This looks ok, yes, but as Geert said, it would seem more intuitive to
> write it as
>
> config CPU_CACHE_ALIASING
>          bool "Aliasing VIPT cache"
>          depends on CPU_N10 || CPU_D10
>
>> choice
>>         prompt "CPU type"
>>         default CPU_V3
>> config CPU_N15
>>         bool "AndesCore N15"
>>         select CPU_CACHE_NONALIASING
>> config CPU_N13
>>         bool "AndesCore N13"
>>         select CPU_CACHE_NONALIASING if ANDES_PAGE_SIZE_8KB
>> config CPU_N10
>>         bool "AndesCore N10"
>> config CPU_D15
>>         bool "AndesCore D15"
>>         select CPU_CACHE_NONALIASING
>> config CPU_D10
>>         bool "AndesCore D10"
>> config CPU_V3
>>         bool "AndesCore v3 compatible"
>>         select ANDES_PAGE_SIZE_4KB
>> endchoice
>
> Two points here:
>
> - Generally you should not mix 'select' and 'depends on' like this.
>   Either you make the cache aliasing a user visible option that
>   uses 'depends on' with a combination of CPU cores, or you
>   make it a hidden option (with no string after the "bool" keyword)
>   that always gets selected from the per-cpu options.
>
> - There is a  little-known trick with choice statements that allows
>   you to use 'tristate' instead of 'bool' in the choice. In that case,
>   you can enable multiple options together as long as all of them
>   are 'm'.
>
>          Arnd


Thanks.
CPU_CACHE_ALIASING is more intuitive. I will apply it.