All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm64: implement support for static call trampolines
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 16:31:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXGuVdSVe29WoensbxC5fqp4HFQeBK2-oLxHA_BQLp2jww@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1b19fbeccf3d4a75a5ed3a507d29f7dd@AcuMS.aculab.com>

On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 at 16:25, David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> wrote:
>
> From: Frederic Weisbecker
> > Sent: 25 October 2021 13:21
> >
> > Implement arm64 support for the 'unoptimized' static call variety, which
> > routes all calls through a single trampoline that is patched to perform a
> > tail call to the selected function.
> >
> > It is expected that the direct branch instruction will be able to cover
> > the common case. However, given that static call targets may be located
> > in modules loaded out of direct branching range, we need a fallback path
> > that loads the address into R16 and uses a branch-to-register (BR)
> > instruction to perform an indirect call.
> >
> ...
> > +void arch_static_call_transform(void *site, void *tramp, void *func, bool tail)
> > +{
> > +     /*
> > +      * -0x8 <literal>
> > +      *  0x0 bti c           <--- trampoline entry point
> > +      *  0x4 <branch or nop>
> > +      *  0x8 ldr x16, <literal>
> > +      *  0xc cbz x16, 20
> > +      * 0x10 br x16
> > +      * 0x14 ret
> > +      */
>
> Since the 'ldr x16, <literal>' is just a 32bit constant
> (for a pc-relative load).
>

I don't follow. Are you saying it is a 32-bit opcode? This applies to
all AArch64 opcodes.

> Can't you save a word by making offset 0x4 <branch or ldr x16, <literal>> ?
>
> Or am I missing something?
>

On arm64, we can only patch NOPs into branch instructions or vice
versa, or we'd have to run the whole thing under stop_machine() to
ensure that other cores don't fetch garbage.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-25 14:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-25 12:20 [PATCH 0/4] arm64: Support dynamic preemption v2 Frederic Weisbecker
2021-10-25 12:20 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/preempt: Prepare for supporting !CONFIG_GENERIC_ENTRY dynamic preemption Frederic Weisbecker
2021-10-25 12:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: implement support for static call trampolines Frederic Weisbecker
2021-10-25 13:56   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-25 14:08     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-10-25 14:19       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-25 14:44         ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-25 14:55           ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-10-25 15:03             ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-25 15:10               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-10-26 10:36                 ` Mark Rutland
2021-10-26 10:45                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-26 11:06                   ` David Laight
2021-10-27 12:47                     ` Mark Rutland
2021-10-25 15:03             ` David Laight
2021-10-25 14:25   ` David Laight
2021-10-25 14:31     ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
2021-10-25 14:38       ` David Laight
2021-10-25 12:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] arm64: Implement IRQ exit preemption static call for dynamic preemption Frederic Weisbecker
2021-10-25 12:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] arm64: Implement HAVE_PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Frederic Weisbecker
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-09-20 23:32 [PATCH 0/4] arm64: Support dynamic preemption Frederic Weisbecker
2021-09-20 23:32 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: implement support for static call trampolines Frederic Weisbecker
2021-09-21  7:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-21 14:44     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-09-21 15:08       ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-21 15:33       ` Mark Rutland
2021-09-21 15:55         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-09-21 16:28           ` Mark Rutland
2021-09-25 17:46             ` David Laight
2021-09-27  8:58               ` Mark Rutland
2021-09-21 16:10   ` Ard Biesheuvel

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=CAMj1kXGuVdSVe29WoensbxC5fqp4HFQeBK2-oLxHA_BQLp2jww@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=will@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 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.