| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <e78f6e6294c31d889ace4de3a3c3cebad04f4213.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 12:38:18 +0100
From: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
"'Jason Gunthorpe'"
<jgg@...dia.com>
Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christian Borntraeger
<borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen
<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Gerald Schaefer
<gerald.schaefer@...ux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>, Heiko
Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Justin
Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Leon
Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-s390@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
"llvm@...ts.linux.dev"
<llvm@...ts.linux.dev>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Bill Wendling
<morbo@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick
Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org"
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Salil Mehta
<salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Jijie Shao <shaojijie@...wei.com>,
Sven Schnelle
<svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mark Rutland
<mark.rutland@....com>,
Michael Guralnik <michaelgur@...lanox.com>,
"patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
Will Deacon
<will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] arm64/io: Provide a WC friendly __iowriteXX_copy()
On Fri, 2024-02-23 at 09:07 +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Jason Gunthorpe
> > Sent: 22 February 2024 22:36
> > To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:05:04PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > > From: Jason Gunthorpe
> > > > Sent: 21 February 2024 01:17
> > > >
> > > > The kernel provides driver support for using write combining IO memory
> > > > through the __iowriteXX_copy() API which is commonly used as an optional
> > > > optimization to generate 16/32/64 byte MemWr TLPs in a PCIe environment.
> > > >
> > > ...
> > > > Implement __iowrite32/64_copy() specifically for ARM64 and use inline
> > > > assembly to build consecutive blocks of STR instructions. Provide direct
> > > > support for 64/32/16 large TLP generation in this manner. Optimize for
> > > > common constant lengths so that the compiler can directly inline the store
> > > > blocks.
> > > ...
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * This generates a memcpy that works on a from/to address which is aligned to
> > > > + * bits. Count is in terms of the number of bits sized quantities to copy. It
> > > > + * optimizes to use the STR groupings when possible so that it is WC friendly.
> > > > + */
> > > > +#define memcpy_toio_aligned(to, from, count, bits) \
> > > > + ({ \
> > > > + volatile u##bits __iomem *_to = to; \
> > > > + const u##bits *_from = from; \
> > > > + size_t _count = count; \
> > > > + const u##bits *_end_from = _from + ALIGN_DOWN(_count, 8); \
> > > > + \
> > > > + for (; _from < _end_from; _from += 8, _to += 8) \
> > > > + __const_memcpy_toio_aligned##bits(_to, _from, 8); \
> > > > + if ((_count % 8) >= 4) {
> > >
> > > If (_count & 4) {
> >
> > That would be obfuscating, IMHO. The compiler doesn't need such things
> > to generate optimal code.
>
> Try it: https://godbolt.org/z/EvvGrTxv3
> And it isn't that obfuscated - no more so than your version.
>
> > > > + __const_memcpy_toio_aligned##bits(_to, _from, 1); \
> > > > + })
> > >
> > > But that looks bit a bit large to be inlined.
> >
> > You trimmed alot, this #define is in a C file and it is a template to
> > generate the 32 and 64 bit out of line functions. Things are done like
> > this because the 32/64 version are exactly the same logic except just
> > with different types and sizes.
>
> I missed that in a quick read at 11pm :-(
>
> Although I doubt that generating long TLP from byte writes is
> really necessary.
I might have gotten confused but I think these are not byte writes.
Remember that the count is in terms of the number of bits sized
quantities to copy so "count == 1" is 4/8 bytes here.
> IIRC you were merging at most 4 writes.
> So better to do a single 32bit write instead.
> (Unless you have misaligned source data - unlikely.)
>
> While write-combining to generate long TLP is probably mostly
> safe for PCIe targets, there are some that will only handle
> TLP for single 32bit data items.
> Which might be why the code is explicitly requesting 4 byte copies.
> So it may be entirely wrong to write-combine anything except
> the generic memcpy_toio().
>
> David
On anything other than s390x this should only do write-combine if the
memory mapping allows it, no? Meaning a driver that can't handle larger
TLPs really shouldn't use ioremap_wc() then.
On s390x one could argue that our version of __iowriteXX_copy() is
strictly speaking not correct in that zpci_memcpy_toio() doesn't really
use XX bit writes which is why for us memcpy_toio() was actually a
better fit indeed. On the other hand doing 32 bit PCI stores (an s390x
thing) can't combine multiple stores into a single TLP which these
functions are used for and which has much more use cases than forcing a
copy loop with 32/64 bit sized writes which would also be a lot slower
on s390x than an aligned zpci_memcpy_toio().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists