linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
	aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, bsingharora@gmail.com,
	dave.hansen@intel.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 01/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 4K backed hpte pages.
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:37:27 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7348e178-b79e-421a-8dd5-4cfbcd56027a@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1497671564-20030-2-git-send-email-linuxram@us.ibm.com>

On 06/17/2017 09:22 AM, Ram Pai wrote:
> Rearrange 64K PTE bits to  free  up  bits 3, 4, 5  and  6
> in the 4K backed hpte pages. These bits continue to be used
> for 64K backed hpte pages in this patch, but will be freed
> up in the next patch.
> 
> The patch does the following change to the 64K PTE format
> 
> H_PAGE_BUSY moves from bit 3 to bit 9
> H_PAGE_F_SECOND which occupied bit 4 moves to the second part
> 	of the pte.
> H_PAGE_F_GIX which  occupied bit 5, 6 and 7 also moves to the
> 	second part of the pte.
> 
> the four  bits((H_PAGE_F_SECOND|H_PAGE_F_GIX) that represent a slot
> is  initialized  to  0xF  indicating  an invalid  slot.  If  a hpte
> gets cached in a 0xF  slot(i.e  7th  slot  of  secondary),  it   is
> released immediately. In  other  words, even  though   0xF   is   a
> valid slot we discard  and consider it as an invalid
> slot;i.e hpte_soft_invalid(). This  gives  us  an opportunity to not
> depend on a bit in the primary PTE in order to determine the
> validity of a slot.
> 
> When  we  release  a    hpte   in the 0xF   slot we also   release a
> legitimate primary   slot  and    unmap    that  entry. This  is  to
> ensure  that we do get a   legimate   non-0xF  slot the next time we
> retry for a slot.
> 
> Though treating 0xF slot as invalid reduces the number of available
> slots  and  may  have an effect  on the performance, the probabilty
> of hitting a 0xF is extermely low.
> 
> Compared  to the current scheme, the above described scheme reduces
> the number of false hash table updates  significantly  and  has the
> added  advantage  of  releasing  four  valuable  PTE bits for other
> purpose.
> 
> This idea was jointly developed by Paul Mackerras, Aneesh, Michael
> Ellermen and myself.
> 
> 4K PTE format remain unchanged currently.

Scanned through the PTE format again for hash 64K and 4K. It seems
to me that there might be 5 free bits already present on the PTE
format. I might have seriously mistaken something here :) Please
correct me if that is not the case. _RPAGE_RPN* I think is applicable
only for hash page table format and will not be available for radix
later.

+#define _PAGE_FREE_1           0x0000000000000040UL /* Not used */
+#define _RPAGE_SW0             0x2000000000000000UL /* Not used */
+#define _RPAGE_SW1             0x0000000000000800UL /* Not used */
+#define _RPAGE_RPN42           0x0040000000000000UL /* Not used */
+#define _RPAGE_RPN41           0x0020000000000000UL /* Not used */

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-06-22  9:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-17  3:52 [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 01/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 4K backed hpte pages Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:20   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:23     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  5:35       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:34         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  6:41   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  9:30     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-22  9:07   ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2017-06-22 16:20     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 02/12] powerpc: Free up four 64K PTE bits in 64K " Ram Pai
2017-06-20 10:51   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:25     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  6:50   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  6:54   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21 20:14     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 03/12] powerpc: Implement sys_pkey_alloc and sys_pkey_free system call Ram Pai
2017-06-19 12:18   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20 22:45     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 04/12] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 05/12] powerpc: Implementation for sys_mprotect_pkey() system call Ram Pai
2017-06-21  7:16   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 06/12] powerpc: Program HPTE key protection bits Ram Pai
2017-06-20  8:21   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:26     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 07/12] powerpc: Macro the mask used for checking DSI exception Ram Pai
2017-06-20  8:14   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:28     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  7:25   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-06-21  9:17     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 08/12] powerpc: Handle exceptions caused by violation of pkey protection Ram Pai
2017-06-20  7:24   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:43     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  3:54       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:26         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 09/12] powerpc: Deliver SEGV signal on pkey violation Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:54   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:56     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-21  3:18       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  6:10         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 10/12] powerpc: Read AMR only if pkey-violation caused the exception Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:06   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-19 17:59     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:46       ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20 23:58         ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20 23:56     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 11/12]Documentation: Documentation updates Ram Pai
2017-06-20  6:18   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  0:04     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-17  3:52 ` [RFC v2 12/12]selftest: Updated protection key selftest Ram Pai
2017-06-19 11:04   ` Michael Ellerman
2017-06-20  6:26   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-21  0:10     ` Ram Pai
2017-06-20  5:10 ` [RFC v2 00/12] powerpc: Memory Protection Keys Balbir Singh
2017-06-20  6:05   ` Anshuman Khandual
2017-06-20  9:56   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

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=7348e178-b79e-421a-8dd5-4cfbcd56027a@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bsingharora@gmail.com \
    --cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
    --cc=hbabu@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=paulus@samba.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).