From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Jackson Cooper-Driver <Jackson.Cooper-Driver@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/sme: Restore SMCR_EL1.EZT0 on exit from suspend
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 14:34:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ca380b64-3420-4817-b3b4-584b8640c0ac@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZbjVTigk0YlGd3mA@e133380.arm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1143 bytes --]
On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 10:54:06AM +0000, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 12:02:49AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > + if (system_supports_sme2())
> > + smcr |= SMCR_ELx_EZT0;
> Side question: since ZT0 is likely to be sporadically used, maybe it
> is worth having separate lazy restore for it versus the main SME state?
> (Not relevant for this series though, and probably best deferred until
> there is hardware to benchmark on. Also, ZT0 is small compared with
> the SME state proper...)
One of the advantages SME has here is that we've got a clear indication
if userspace is actively using the registers through SMSTART and SMSTOP.
We only restore ZT0 at all whenever PSTATE.ZA is set and the strong
recommendation is that should only be set when either ZA or ZT0 are in
active use for power and performance reasons. While it is likely that
there will be code that uses ZA but doesn't touch ZT0 I would expect
that the overhead of entering the kernel to do a lazy restore will be
sufficiently high for it to be an unreasonable penalty on code that does
touch it, as you say it's not *that* big compared to likely ZA sizes.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-30 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-30 0:02 [PATCH 0/2] arm64/sme: Fix handling of traps on resume Mark Brown
2024-01-30 0:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64/sme: Restore SMCR on exit from suspend Mark Brown
2024-01-30 10:53 ` Dave Martin
2024-01-30 12:25 ` Mark Brown
2024-01-30 12:42 ` Mark Brown
2024-01-30 0:02 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64/sme: Restore SMCR_EL1.EZT0 " Mark Brown
2024-01-30 10:54 ` Dave Martin
2024-01-30 14:34 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2024-01-30 15:10 ` Dave Martin
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=ca380b64-3420-4817-b3b4-584b8640c0ac@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=Jackson.Cooper-Driver@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.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).