linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	hpa@zytor.com
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	luto@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v7 2/2] x86/split_lock: Avoid runtime reads of the TEST_CTRL MSR
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 11:09:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200325030924.132881-3-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200325030924.132881-1-xiaoyao.li@intel.com>

In a context switch from a task that is detecting split locks
to one that is not (or vice versa) we need to update the TEST_CTRL
MSR. Currently this is done with the common sequence:
	read the MSR
	flip the bit
	write the MSR
in order to avoid changing the value of any reserved bits in the MSR.

Cache unused and reserved bits of TEST_CTRL MSR with SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT
bit cleared during initialization, so we can avoid an expensive RDMSR
instruction during context switch.

Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Originally-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 9 ++++-----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
index deb5c42c2089..1f414578899c 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ enum split_lock_detect_state {
  * split lock detect, unless there is a command line override.
  */
 static enum split_lock_detect_state sld_state __ro_after_init = sld_off;
+static u64 msr_test_ctrl_cache __ro_after_init;
 
 /*
  * Processors which have self-snooping capability can handle conflicting
@@ -1037,6 +1038,8 @@ static void __init split_lock_setup(void)
 		break;
 	}
 
+	rdmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTRL, msr_test_ctrl_cache);
+
 	if (!split_lock_verify_msr(true)) {
 		pr_info("MSR access failed: Disabled\n");
 		return;
@@ -1053,14 +1056,10 @@ static void __init split_lock_setup(void)
  */
 static void sld_update_msr(bool on)
 {
-	u64 test_ctrl_val;
-
-	rdmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val);
+	u64 test_ctrl_val = msr_test_ctrl_cache;
 
 	if (on)
 		test_ctrl_val |= MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT;
-	else
-		test_ctrl_val &= ~MSR_TEST_CTRL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT;
 
 	wrmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTRL, test_ctrl_val);
 }
-- 
2.20.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-03-25  3:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-25  3:09 [PATCH v7 0/2] Fix and optimization of split_lock_detection Xiaoyao Li
2020-03-25  3:09 ` [PATCH v7 1/2] x86/split_lock: Rework the initialization flow of split lock detection Xiaoyao Li
2020-03-28 16:32   ` Sean Christopherson
2020-03-30 13:26     ` Xiaoyao Li
2020-03-30 14:26       ` Sean Christopherson
2020-03-25  3:09 ` Xiaoyao Li [this message]
2020-03-28 16:34   ` [PATCH v7 2/2] x86/split_lock: Avoid runtime reads of the TEST_CTRL MSR Sean Christopherson
2020-03-29  9:13     ` Xiaoyao Li
2020-03-30 18:18       ` Sean Christopherson
2020-04-03 17:44 ` [PATCH 0/1] x86/split_lock: check split lock feature on initialization Benjamin Lamowski
2020-04-03 17:44   ` [PATCH 1/1] " Benjamin Lamowski
2020-04-03 18:01     ` Sean Christopherson
2020-04-06  8:23       ` Benjamin Lamowski
2020-04-06 11:48         ` Xiaoyao Li
2020-04-06 15:57           ` [PATCH v2 0/1] x86/split_lock: check split lock support " Benjamin Lamowski
2020-04-06 16:02             ` [PATCH v2 1/1] " Benjamin Lamowski
2020-04-06 16:17               ` [PATCH v3 " Benjamin Lamowski
2020-04-06 21:24                 ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-04-06 21:21   ` [PATCH 0/1] x86/split_lock: check split lock feature " Thomas Gleixner

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=20200325030924.132881-3-xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
    --to=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=nivedita@alum.mit.edu \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).