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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 4B736C49ED7 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:12:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (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 C224C20717 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:12:45 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C224C20717 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46V8zv3TdnzF5KD for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 19:12:43 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=ldufour@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46V8xd5bqJzF4Zr for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 19:10:45 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x8D97X8V040729 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 05:10:42 -0400 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2v07es9qu4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 05:10:41 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 10:10:39 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Fri, 13 Sep 2019 10:10:36 +0100 Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.160]) by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x8D9AZWC58327128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:10:35 GMT Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C490A4060; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:10:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8282A405C; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:10:34 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pomme.local (unknown [9.145.117.92]) by b06wcsmtp001.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 09:10:34 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] powperc/mm: read TLB Block Invalidate Characteristics To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , mpe@ellerman.id.au, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, npiggin@gmail.com References: <20190830120712.22971-1-ldufour@linux.ibm.com> <20190830120712.22971-3-ldufour@linux.ibm.com> <87impxshfk.fsf@linux.ibm.com> <468a53a6-a970-5526-8035-eef59dcf48ed@linux.ibm.com> <97bafb53-6ae9-1d42-1816-ef81b845b80c@linux.ibm.com> From: Laurent Dufour Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 11:10:34 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <97bafb53-6ae9-1d42-1816-ef81b845b80c@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19091309-0012-0000-0000-0000034ACACB X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19091309-0013-0000-0000-000021853A28 Message-Id: <76cd8c5e-0a7f-1aa0-0004-c7a874085ce1@linux.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-09-13_05:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=879 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1908290000 definitions=main-1909130088 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Le 13/09/2019 à 04:00, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit : > On 9/13/19 12:56 AM, Laurent Dufour wrote: >> Le 12/09/2019 à 16:44, Aneesh Kumar K.V a écrit : >>> Laurent Dufour writes: > >>>> + >>>> + idx = 2; >>>> + while (idx < len) { >>>> + unsigned int block_size = local_buffer[idx++]; >>>> + unsigned int npsize; >>>> + >>>> + if (!block_size) >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + block_size = 1 << block_size; >>>> + if (block_size != 8) >>>> + /* We only support 8 bytes size TLB invalidate buffer */ >>>> + pr_warn("Unsupported H_BLOCK_REMOVE block size : %d\n", >>>> + block_size); >>> >>> Should we skip setting block size if we find block_size != 8? Also can >>> we avoid doing that pr_warn in loop and only warn if we don't find >>> block_size 8 in the invalidate characteristics array? >> >> My idea here is to fully read and process the data returned by the hcall, >> and to put the limitation to 8 when checking before calling H_BLOCK_REMOVE. >> The warning is there because I want it to be displayed once at boot. >> > > > Can we have two block size reported for the same base page size/actual page > size combination? If so we will overwrite the hblk[actual_psize] ? In check_lp_set_hblk() I'm only keeping the bigger one. > >>> >>>> + >>>> + for (npsize = local_buffer[idx++]; npsize > 0; npsize--) >>>> + check_lp_set_hblk((unsigned int) local_buffer[idx++], >>>> + block_size); >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> + for (bpsize = 0; bpsize < MMU_PAGE_COUNT; bpsize++) >>>> + for (idx = 0; idx < MMU_PAGE_COUNT; idx++) >>>> + if (mmu_psize_defs[bpsize].hblk[idx]) >>>> + pr_info("H_BLOCK_REMOVE supports base psize:%d >>>> psize:%d block size:%d", >>>> + bpsize, idx, >>>> + mmu_psize_defs[bpsize].hblk[idx]); >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> +machine_arch_initcall(pseries, read_tlbbi_characteristics); >>>> + >>>> /* >>>> * Take a spinlock around flushes to avoid bouncing the hypervisor tlbie >>>> * lock. > > -aneesh