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=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable 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 23213C54FD2 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 02:48:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE5AA20724 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 02:48:42 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DE5AA20724 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 8C9CF6B000A; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 22:48:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 879EE6B000C; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 22:48:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 78E936B000D; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 22:48:42 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0251.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.251]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FAF16B000A for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 22:48:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin19.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E92153A82 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 02:48:41 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76632351642.19.love67_4bb2bad6b3b19 X-HE-Tag: love67_4bb2bad6b3b19 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 4019 Received: from huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190]) by imf49.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 02:48:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id D916CC1B1F67DC29052A; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:47:41 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.173.220.25) by DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:47:32 +0800 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 3/6] arm64: Add level-hinted TLB invalidation helper to tlbi_user To: Marc Zyngier CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20200324134534.1570-1-yezhenyu2@huawei.com> <20200324134534.1570-4-yezhenyu2@huawei.com> <20200324141939.51917225@why> From: Zhenyu Ye Message-ID: <8cf6c576-f0e2-9a52-6919-cb5e27d2ffb5@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 10:47:31 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200324141939.51917225@why> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.173.220.25] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Hi Marc, On 2020/3/24 22:19, Marc Zyngier wrote: > On Tue, 24 Mar 2020 21:45:31 +0800 > Zhenyu Ye wrote: > >> Add a level-hinted parameter to __tlbi_user, which only gets used >> if ARMv8.4-TTL gets detected. >> >> ARMv8.4-TTL provides the TTL field in tlbi instruction to indicate >> the level of translation table walk holding the leaf entry for the >> address that is being invalidated. >> >> This patch set the default level value to 0. >> >> Signed-off-by: Zhenyu Ye >> --- >> arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h >> index a3f70778a325..d141c080e494 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/tlbflush.h >> @@ -89,6 +89,36 @@ >> __tlbi(op, arg); \ >> } while(0) >> >> +#define __tlbi_user_level(op, addr, level) \ >> + do { \ >> + u64 arg = addr; \ >> + \ >> + if (!arm64_kernel_unmapped_at_el0()) \ >> + break; \ >> + \ >> + if (cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_ARMv8_4_TTL) && \ >> + level) { \ >> + u64 ttl = level; \ >> + \ >> + switch (PAGE_SIZE) { \ >> + case SZ_4K: \ >> + ttl |= 1 << 2; \ >> + break; \ >> + case SZ_16K: \ >> + ttl |= 2 << 2; \ >> + break; \ >> + case SZ_64K: \ >> + ttl |= 3 << 2; \ >> + break; \ >> + } \ >> + \ >> + arg &= ~TLBI_TTL_MASK; \ >> + arg |= FIELD_PREP(TLBI_TTL_MASK, ttl); \ >> + } \ >> + \ >> + __tlbi(op, (arg) | USER_ASID_FLAG); >> \ >> + } while (0) >> + > > Isn't this just: > > define __tlbi_user_level(op, addr, level) \ > do { \ > if (!arm64_kernel_unmapped_at_el0()) \ > break; \ > \ > __tlbi_level(op, addr | USER_ASID_FLAG, level); \ > } while (0) > > Thanks, > > M. > Yeah, your code is more clear! I will take it in next version. ;-) Thanks, zhenyu