Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mm: Restore mm_cpumask (revert commit 38d96287504a ("arm64: mm: kill mm_cpumask usage"))

[Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>]

Hi,

I know Will is on the case but just expressing some thoughts of my own.

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:32:54PM +0900, Takao Indoh wrote:
> From: Takao Indoh <indou.takao@fujitsu.com>
> 
> mm_cpumask was deleted by the commit 38d96287504a ("arm64: mm: kill
> mm_cpumask usage") because it was not used at that time. Now this is needed
> to find appropriate CPUs for TLB flush, so this patch reverts this commit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: QI Fuli <qi.fuli@fujitsu.com>
> Signed-off-by: Takao Indoh <indou.takao@fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h | 7 ++++++-
>  arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c              | 6 ++++++
>  arch/arm64/mm/context.c              | 2 ++
>  3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h
> index 2da3e478fd8f..21ef11590bcb 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/mmu_context.h
> @@ -241,8 +241,13 @@ static inline void
>  switch_mm(struct mm_struct *prev, struct mm_struct *next,
>  	  struct task_struct *tsk)
>  {
> -	if (prev != next)
> +	unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> +
> +	if (prev != next) {
>  		__switch_mm(next);
> +		cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, mm_cpumask(prev));
> +		local_flush_tlb_mm(prev);
> +	}

That's not actually a revert as we've never flushed the TLBs on the
switch_mm() path. Also, this flush is not sufficient on a CnP capable
CPU since another thread of the same CPU could have the prev TTBR0_EL1
value set and loading the TLB back.

-- 
Catalin