All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	segher@kernel.crashing.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq()
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 17:14:45 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877e3tbvsa.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5ca6639b7c1c21ee4b4138b7cfb31d6245c4195c.1570684298.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>

Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:

> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are quite similar on PPC32 and
> PPC64 and are simple enough to be worth inlining.
>
> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack.
>
> This is inspired from S390 arch. Several other arches do more or
> less the same. The way sparc arch does seems odd thought.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> Reviewed-by: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
>
> ---
> v2: no change.
> v3: no change.
> v4:
> - comment reminding the purpose of the inline asm block.
> - added r2 as clobbered reg

That breaks 64-bit with GCC9:

  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_IRQ':
  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:650:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
    650 |  asm volatile(
        |  ^~~
  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_softirq_own_stack':
  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:711:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
    711 |  asm volatile(
        |  ^~~


> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> index 04204be49577..d62fe18405a0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -642,6 +642,22 @@ void __do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	irq_exit();
>  }
>  
> +static inline void call_do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs, void *sp)
> +{
> +	register unsigned long r3 asm("r3") = (unsigned long)regs;
> +
> +	/* Temporarily switch r1 to sp, call __do_irq() then restore r1 */
> +	asm volatile(
> +		"	"PPC_STLU"	1, %2(%1);\n"
> +		"	mr		1, %1;\n"
> +		"	bl		%3;\n"
> +		"	"PPC_LL"	1, 0(1);\n" :
> +		"+r"(r3) :
> +		"b"(sp), "i"(THREAD_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD), "i"(__do_irq) :
> +		"lr", "xer", "ctr", "memory", "cr0", "cr1", "cr5", "cr6", "cr7",
> +		"r0", "r2", "r4", "r5", "r6", "r7", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11", "r12");
> +}

If we add a nop after the bl, so the linker could insert a TOC restore,
then I don't think there's any circumstance under which we expect this
to actually clobber r2, is there?

cheers

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	segher@kernel.crashing.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq()
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 17:14:45 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <877e3tbvsa.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5ca6639b7c1c21ee4b4138b7cfb31d6245c4195c.1570684298.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>

Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:

> call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() are quite similar on PPC32 and
> PPC64 and are simple enough to be worth inlining.
>
> Inlining them avoids an mflr/mtlr pair plus a save/reload on stack.
>
> This is inspired from S390 arch. Several other arches do more or
> less the same. The way sparc arch does seems odd thought.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
> Reviewed-by: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
>
> ---
> v2: no change.
> v3: no change.
> v4:
> - comment reminding the purpose of the inline asm block.
> - added r2 as clobbered reg

That breaks 64-bit with GCC9:

  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_IRQ':
  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:650:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
    650 |  asm volatile(
        |  ^~~
  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c: In function 'do_softirq_own_stack':
  arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:711:2: error: PIC register clobbered by 'r2' in 'asm'
    711 |  asm volatile(
        |  ^~~


> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> index 04204be49577..d62fe18405a0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -642,6 +642,22 @@ void __do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  	irq_exit();
>  }
>  
> +static inline void call_do_irq(struct pt_regs *regs, void *sp)
> +{
> +	register unsigned long r3 asm("r3") = (unsigned long)regs;
> +
> +	/* Temporarily switch r1 to sp, call __do_irq() then restore r1 */
> +	asm volatile(
> +		"	"PPC_STLU"	1, %2(%1);\n"
> +		"	mr		1, %1;\n"
> +		"	bl		%3;\n"
> +		"	"PPC_LL"	1, 0(1);\n" :
> +		"+r"(r3) :
> +		"b"(sp), "i"(THREAD_SIZE - STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD), "i"(__do_irq) :
> +		"lr", "xer", "ctr", "memory", "cr0", "cr1", "cr5", "cr6", "cr7",
> +		"r0", "r2", "r4", "r5", "r6", "r7", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11", "r12");
> +}

If we add a nop after the bl, so the linker could insert a TOC restore,
then I don't think there's any circumstance under which we expect this
to actually clobber r2, is there?

cheers

  reply	other threads:[~2019-11-21  6:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-10  5:36 [PATCH v4 1/2] powerpc/irq: bring back ksp_limit management in C functions Christophe Leroy
2019-10-10  5:36 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-10-10  5:36 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] powerpc/irq: inline call_do_irq() and call_do_softirq() Christophe Leroy
2019-10-10  5:36   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-21  6:14   ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2019-11-21  6:14     ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-21 10:15     ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-21 10:15       ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-25 10:32       ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-25 10:32         ` Michael Ellerman
2019-11-25 14:25         ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-25 14:25           ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-27 13:50           ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-27 13:50             ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-27 14:59             ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-27 14:59               ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-27 15:15               ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-27 15:15                 ` Christophe Leroy
2019-11-29 18:46                 ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-11-29 18:46                   ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-04  4:32                   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-04  4:32                     ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-06 20:59                     ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-06 20:59                       ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-07  9:42                       ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-07  9:42                         ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-07 17:40                         ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-07 17:40                           ` Segher Boessenkool
2019-12-09 10:53                           ` Michael Ellerman
2019-12-09 10:53                             ` Michael Ellerman
2019-12-19  6:57                             ` Christophe Leroy
2019-12-19  6:57                               ` Christophe Leroy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=877e3tbvsa.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.