From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:58246 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752038AbeEOKjl (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 15 May 2018 06:39:41 -0400
Date: Tue, 15 May 2018 11:39:36 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@dominikbrodowski.net,
        james.morse@arm.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/18] arm64: move sve_user_{enable, disable} to
 <asm/fpsimd.h>
Message-ID: <20180515103936.v5ytofdq3qqtsomn@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <20180514094640.27569-1-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <20180514094640.27569-7-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <20180514110649.GC7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180514110649.GC7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 12:06:50PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:46:28AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > In subsequent patches, we'll want to make use of sve_user_enable() and
> > sve_user_disable() outside of kernel/fpsimd.c. Let's move these to
> > <asm/fpsimd.h> where we can make use of them.
> > 
> > To avoid ifdeffery in sequences like:
> > 
> > if (system_supports_sve() && some_condition
> > 	sve_user_disable();
> > 
> > ... empty stubs are provided when support for SVE is not enabled.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@arm.com>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
> >  arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c      | 11 -----------
> >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h
> > index aa7162ae93e3..7377d7593c06 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/fpsimd.h
> > @@ -16,11 +16,13 @@
> >  #ifndef __ASM_FP_H
> >  #define __ASM_FP_H
> >  
> > -#include <asm/ptrace.h>
> >  #include <asm/errno.h>
> > +#include <asm/ptrace.h>
> > +#include <asm/sysreg.h>
> >  
> >  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> >  
> > +#include <linux/build_bug.h>
> >  #include <linux/cache.h>
> >  #include <linux/init.h>
> >  #include <linux/stddef.h>
> > @@ -81,6 +83,16 @@ extern int sve_set_vector_length(struct task_struct *task,
> >  extern int sve_set_current_vl(unsigned long arg);
> >  extern int sve_get_current_vl(void);
> >  
> > +static inline void sve_user_disable(void)
> > +{
> > +	sysreg_clear_set(cpacr_el1, CPACR_EL1_ZEN_EL0EN, 0);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void sve_user_enable(void)
> > +{
> > +	sysreg_clear_set(cpacr_el1, 0, CPACR_EL1_ZEN_EL0EN);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * Probing and setup functions.
> >   * Calls to these functions must be serialised with one another.
> > @@ -107,6 +119,9 @@ static inline int sve_get_current_vl(void)
> >  	return -EINVAL;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static inline void sve_user_disable(void) { }
> > +static inline void sve_user_enable(void) { }
> > +
> 
> Alternatively, just move the full definitions outside the #ifdef
> CONFIG_ARM64_SVE.

Can do, though I was trying to keep the exsting pattern with empty
inlines for the !CONFIG_ARM64_SVE case.

> 
> All calls to these should be shadowed by an if
> (system_supports_sve()) in any case, and setting/clearing ZEN_EL0EN
> in the CPACR_EL1 ought to be harmless now that the meaning of these
> bits architecturally committed.
> 
> Ideally we would have a BUG_ON(!system_supports_sve()) in those
> functions, but we won't won't to pay the cost in a production kernel.

Earlier I'd put BUILD_BUG() in the body for the !CONFIG_ARM64_SVE case,
to catch that kind of thing -- I could restore that.

> >  static inline void sve_init_vq_map(void) { }
> >  static inline void sve_update_vq_map(void) { }
> >  static inline int sve_verify_vq_map(void) { return 0; }
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> > index 088940387a4d..79a81c7d85c6 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/fpsimd.c
> > @@ -159,7 +159,6 @@ static void sve_free(struct task_struct *task)
> >  	__sve_free(task);
> >  }
> >  
> > -
> 
> Hmmm, Ack.  Check for conflicts with the KVM FPSIMD rework [1] (though
> trivial).

I'll assume that Ack stands regardless. :)

Thanks,
Mark.