linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] powerpc/6xx: Don't set back MSR_RI before reenabling MMU
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 14:24:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b8c1836e-1172-285d-4935-5a4dcced4b3d@c-s.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17b00097-a807-e9b9-3dce-198df4a3153f@c-s.fr>



Le 01/02/2019 à 12:51, Christophe Leroy a écrit :
> 
> 
> Le 01/02/2019 à 12:10, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
>> Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr> writes:
>>
>>> By delaying the setting of MSR_RI, a 1% improvment is optained on
>>> null_syscall selftest on an mpc8321.
>>>
>>> Without this patch:
>>>
>>> root@vgoippro:~# ./null_syscall
>>>     1134.33 ns     378.11 cycles
>>>
>>> With this patch:
>>>
>>> root@vgoippro:~# ./null_syscall
>>>     1121.85 ns     373.95 cycles
>>>
>>> The drawback is that a machine check during that period
>>> would be unrecoverable, but as only main memory is accessed
>>> during that period, it shouldn't be a concern.
>>
>> On 64-bit server CPUs accessing main memory can cause a UE
>> (Uncorrectable Error) which can trigger a machine check.
>>
>> So it may still be a concern, it depends how paranoid you are.
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_32.S 
>>> b/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_32.S
>>> index 146385b1c2da..ea28a6ab56ec 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_32.S
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/head_32.S
>>> @@ -282,8 +282,6 @@ __secondary_hold_acknowledge:
>>>       stw    r1,GPR1(r11);    \
>>>       stw    r1,0(r11);    \
>>>       tovirt(r1,r11);            /* set new kernel sp */    \
>>> -    li    r10,MSR_KERNEL & ~(MSR_IR|MSR_DR); /* can take exceptions 
>>> */ \
>>> -    MTMSRD(r10);            /* (except for mach check in rtas) */ \
>>>       stw    r0,GPR0(r11);    \
>>>       lis    r10,STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER@ha; /* exception frame 
>>> marker */ \
>>>       addi    r10,r10,STACK_FRAME_REGS_MARKER@l; \
>>
>> Where does RI get enabled? I don't see it anywhere obvious.
> 
> MSR_RI is part of MSR_KERNEL, it gets then enabled when reenabling MMU 
> when calling the exception handler.
> 
> #define EXC_XFER_TEMPLATE(n, hdlr, trap, copyee, tfer, ret)    \
>      li    r10,trap;                    \
>      stw    r10,_TRAP(r11);                    \
>      li    r10,MSR_KERNEL;                    \
>      copyee(r10, r9);                    \
>      bl    tfer;                        \
> i##n:                                \
>      .long    hdlr;                        \
>      .long    ret
> 
> where tfer = transfer_to_handler.
> 
> In transfer_to_handler (kernel/entry_32.S) you have:
> 
> transfer_to_handler_cont:
> 3:
>      mflr    r9
>      lwz    r11,0(r9)        /* virtual address of handler */
>      lwz    r9,4(r9)        /* where to go when done */
> [...]
>      mtspr    SPRN_SRR0,r11
>      mtspr    SPRN_SRR1,r10
>      mtlr    r9
>      SYNC
>      RFI                /* jump to handler, enable MMU */
> 
> So MSR_RI is restored above as r10 contains MSR_KERNEL [ | MSR_EE ]
> 

Looks like fast_exception_return, which is called by hash page handlers 
at least, expects MSR_RI to be set. Allthough it works well on 603 
(because it doesn't hash), I would most likely not work on others.

This 1% improvment is not worth it, I give up for now.

      reply	other threads:[~2019-02-12 13:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-31 17:44 [RFC PATCH] powerpc/6xx: Don't set back MSR_RI before reenabling MMU Christophe Leroy
2019-02-01 11:10 ` Michael Ellerman
2019-02-01 11:51   ` Christophe Leroy
2019-02-12 13:24     ` Christophe Leroy [this message]

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=b8c1836e-1172-285d-4935-5a4dcced4b3d@c-s.fr \
    --to=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --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).