From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick Daly Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 24/26] arm64: mte: Introduce early param to disable MTE support Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 22:57:10 -0700 Message-ID: <20200522055710.GA25791@pdaly-linux.qualcomm.com> References: <20200515171612.1020-1-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <20200515171612.1020-25-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <20200518113103.GA32394@willie-the-truck> <20200518172054.GL9862@gaia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail27.static.mailgun.info ([104.130.122.27]:27416 "EHLO mail27.static.mailgun.info" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725894AbgEVF5T (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 May 2020 01:57:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200518172054.GL9862@gaia> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Will Deacon , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Vladimir Murzin , Szabolcs Nagy , Andrey Konovalov , Kevin Brodsky , linux-mm@kvack.org, Vincenzo Frascino , Peter Collingbourne , Dave P Martin , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:20:55PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:31:03PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:26:30PM +0100, Vladimir Murzin wrote: > > > On 5/15/20 6:16 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > For performance analysis it may be desirable to disable MTE altogether > > > > via an early param. Introduce arm64.mte_disable and, if true, filter out > > > > the sanitised ID_AA64PFR1_EL1.MTE field to avoid exposing the HWCAP to > > > > user. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas > > > > Cc: Will Deacon > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Notes: > > > > New in v4. > > > > > > > > Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 4 ++++ > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > > > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > index f2a93c8679e8..7436e7462b85 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > @@ -373,6 +373,10 @@ > > > > arcrimi= [HW,NET] ARCnet - "RIM I" (entirely mem-mapped) cards > > > > Format: ,, > > > > > > > > + arm64.mte_disable= > > > > + [ARM64] Disable Linux support for the Memory > > > > + Tagging Extension (both user and in-kernel). > > > > + > > > > > > Should it really to take parameter (on/off/true/false)? It may lead to expectation > > > that arm64.mte_disable=false should enable MT and, yes, double negatives make it > > > look ugly, so if we do need parameter, can it be arm64.mte=on/off/true/false? > > > > I don't think "performance analysis" is a good justification for this > > parameter tbh. We don't tend to add these options for other architectural > > features, and I don't see why MTE is any different in this regard. > > There is an expectation of performance impact with MTE enabled, > especially if it's running in synchronous mode. For the in-kernel MTE, > we could add a parameter which sets sync vs async at boot time rather > than a big disable knob. It won't affect user space however. > > The other 'justification' is if your hardware has weird unexpected > behaviour but I'd like this handled via errata workarounds. > > I'll let the people who asked for this to chip in ;). I agree with you > that we rarely add these (and I rejected a similar option a few weeks > ago on the AMU patchset). We've been looking into other ways this on/off behavior could be achieved. The "arm,armv8.5-memtag" DT flag already provides what we want - meaning that this flag could be removed if the system did not support MTE. I did see your remark on "arm64: mte: Check the DT memory nodes for MTE support" questioning whether it was the right approach - is this still the case? --Patrick -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142F5C433E0 for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D192A20776 for ; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="gyspq+eV"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=mg.codeaurora.org header.i=@mg.codeaurora.org header.b="M95QoZxr" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D192A20776 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=1MjvcQbJ5E12mOu30n2Sc2H5XFEkA6qKXYs5kBa8NdY=; b=gyspq+eV0GovKh iOK7vvI4yNwruNhOBPW8x49FYtwm2fG8mrvYRq4w1u9dJZKtv7xytqaQfjfOyRSP0d4wnIhufom1V jXjTmnyFi0tjRcXenK3+FVjEfmp6fo7Ro081oWrztFswLkRaXf3wLHOkweflkjYdKpP4belc0f0z7 9hrprdI60HFBVq67L3095bwEkznyxV9F4gZ81gxcjRWWvGS2kDsDKzlNngSCEg08P4ejdTTRWY9Pw ZzTh1bEp6cc1uxSRTBDfhk77/aYe5xUunoxRNZMamWCAlqTAgPa+0f7Dt4iPQAjWMfWhwaqFDPYec 8BXtLOfBMcHoP3A86WWQ==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jc0gN-00010I-7E; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:23 +0000 Received: from mail26.static.mailgun.info ([104.130.122.26]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jc0gJ-0000zZ-HT for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:20 +0000 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1590127038; h=In-Reply-To: Content-Type: MIME-Version: References: Message-ID: Subject: Cc: To: From: Date: Sender; bh=wxYTDj1XX4heEChza4HPVrwYprGUE8YzD1J8/xWHYNM=; b=M95QoZxrWAvjTm0yi9frDH97ict/D7FIHlK05dIc0PEzPF+e9bfWDBoTXDHzA4xYwebdZ8xM x6MFM0h9W1pT/LrhJXv8f5v8v9haXcdSFpnkL6sTM1UC2voT9jJFZs9sVgqxJWKUvC+Dn5XA L2KR2mfTTh0ezPYucE0oygc8T/g= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 104.130.122.26 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyJiYzAxZiIsICJsaW51eC1hcm0ta2VybmVsQGxpc3RzLmluZnJhZGVhZC5vcmciLCAiYmU5ZTRhIl0= Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n01.prod.us-west-2.postgun.com with SMTP id 5ec769bd82c96b5d3b3b9a84 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:17 GMT Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6E7F4C433CB; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pdaly-linux.qualcomm.com (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pdaly) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32E51C433C6; Fri, 22 May 2020 05:57:16 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 32E51C433C6 Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: aws-us-west-2-caf-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=pdaly@codeaurora.org Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 22:57:10 -0700 From: Patrick Daly To: Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 24/26] arm64: mte: Introduce early param to disable MTE support Message-ID: <20200522055710.GA25791@pdaly-linux.qualcomm.com> References: <20200515171612.1020-1-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <20200515171612.1020-25-catalin.marinas@arm.com> <20200518113103.GA32394@willie-the-truck> <20200518172054.GL9862@gaia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200518172054.GL9862@gaia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20200521_225719_643076_02D39740 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.94 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Vladimir Murzin , Szabolcs Nagy , Andrey Konovalov , Kevin Brodsky , Peter Collingbourne , linux-mm@kvack.org, Vincenzo Frascino , Will Deacon , Dave P Martin , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 06:20:55PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:31:03PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 12:26:30PM +0100, Vladimir Murzin wrote: > > > On 5/15/20 6:16 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > > For performance analysis it may be desirable to disable MTE altogether > > > > via an early param. Introduce arm64.mte_disable and, if true, filter out > > > > the sanitised ID_AA64PFR1_EL1.MTE field to avoid exposing the HWCAP to > > > > user. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas > > > > Cc: Will Deacon > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Notes: > > > > New in v4. > > > > > > > > Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 4 ++++ > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 11 +++++++++++ > > > > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > index f2a93c8679e8..7436e7462b85 100644 > > > > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt > > > > @@ -373,6 +373,10 @@ > > > > arcrimi= [HW,NET] ARCnet - "RIM I" (entirely mem-mapped) cards > > > > Format: ,, > > > > > > > > + arm64.mte_disable= > > > > + [ARM64] Disable Linux support for the Memory > > > > + Tagging Extension (both user and in-kernel). > > > > + > > > > > > Should it really to take parameter (on/off/true/false)? It may lead to expectation > > > that arm64.mte_disable=false should enable MT and, yes, double negatives make it > > > look ugly, so if we do need parameter, can it be arm64.mte=on/off/true/false? > > > > I don't think "performance analysis" is a good justification for this > > parameter tbh. We don't tend to add these options for other architectural > > features, and I don't see why MTE is any different in this regard. > > There is an expectation of performance impact with MTE enabled, > especially if it's running in synchronous mode. For the in-kernel MTE, > we could add a parameter which sets sync vs async at boot time rather > than a big disable knob. It won't affect user space however. > > The other 'justification' is if your hardware has weird unexpected > behaviour but I'd like this handled via errata workarounds. > > I'll let the people who asked for this to chip in ;). I agree with you > that we rarely add these (and I rejected a similar option a few weeks > ago on the AMU patchset). We've been looking into other ways this on/off behavior could be achieved. The "arm,armv8.5-memtag" DT flag already provides what we want - meaning that this flag could be removed if the system did not support MTE. I did see your remark on "arm64: mte: Check the DT memory nodes for MTE support" questioning whether it was the right approach - is this still the case? --Patrick -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel