From: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
To: Steffen Eiden <seiden@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, nrb@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] s390/cpufeature: rework to allow more than only hwcap bits
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 21:25:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ys3Kt7nG2jtE8H3H@osiris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220712105220.325010-2-seiden@linux.ibm.com>
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 12:52:18PM +0200, Steffen Eiden wrote:
> Rework cpufeature implementation to allow for various cpu feature
> indications, which is not only limited to hwcap bits. This is achieved
> by adding a sequential list of cpu feature numbers, where each of them
> is mapped to an entry which indicates what this number is about.
>
> Each entry contains a type member, which indicates what feature
> name space to look into (e.g. hwcap, or cpu facility). If wanted this
> allows also to automatically load modules only in e.g. z/VM
> configurations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Steffen Eiden <seiden@linux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
...
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Copyright IBM Corp. 2022
> + * Author(s): Steffen Eiden <seiden@linux.ibm.com>
> + * Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Please don't add my name + email address in source code. I just
recently removed that everywhere since email addresses may change, and
git history is more than enough for me. It's up to you if you want to
keep your name + email address here.
> +static struct s390_cpu_feature s390_cpu_features[MAX_CPU_FEATURES] = {
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_ESAN3] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_ESAN3},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_ZARCH] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_ZARCH},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_STFLE] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_STFLE},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_MSA] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_MSA},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_LDISP] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_LDISP},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_EIMM] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_EIMM},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_DFP] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_DFP},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_HPAGE] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_HPAGE},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_ETF3EH] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_ETF3EH},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_HIGH_GPRS] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_HIGH_GPRS},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_TE] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_TE},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_VXRS] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_VXRS},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_VXRS_BCD] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_VXRS_BCD},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_VXRS_EXT] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_VXRS_EXT},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_GS] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_GS},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_VXRS_EXT2] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_VXRS_EXT2},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_VXRS_PDE] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_VXRS_PDE},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_SORT] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_SORT},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_DFLT] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_DFLT},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_VXRS_PDE2] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_VXRS_PDE2},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_NNPA] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_NNPA},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_PCI_MIO] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_PCI_MIO},
> + [S390_CPU_FEATURE_SIE] = {.type = TYPE_HWCAP, .num = HWCAP_NR_SIE},
> +};
I only realized now that you added all HWCAP bits here. It was
intentional that I added only the two bits which are currently used
for several reasons:
- Keep the array as small as possible.
- No need to keep this array in sync with HWCAPs, if new ones are added.
- There is a for loop in print_cpu_modalias() which iterates over all
MAX_CPU_FEATURES entries; this should be as fast as possible. Adding
extra entries burns cycles for no added value.
Any future user which requires a not yet listed feature, can simply
add it when needed.
> +int cpu_have_feature(unsigned int num)
> +{
> + struct s390_cpu_feature *feature;
> +
> + feature = &s390_cpu_features[num];
> + switch (feature->type) {
> + case TYPE_HWCAP:
> + return !!(elf_hwcap & (1UL << feature->num));
Before somebody else mentions it, I could have done better. Nowadays
this should be:
return !!(elf_hwcap & BIT(feature->num));
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-12 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-07-12 10:52 [PATCH 0/3] s390/cpufeature: rework to allow different types of cpufeatures Steffen Eiden
2022-07-12 10:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] s390/cpufeature: rework to allow more than only hwcap bits Steffen Eiden
2022-07-12 11:56 ` Steffen Eiden
2022-07-12 16:46 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-07-12 19:27 ` Heiko Carstens
2022-07-12 19:25 ` Heiko Carstens [this message]
2022-07-13 8:32 ` Steffen Eiden
2022-07-14 10:52 ` Heiko Carstens
2022-07-15 8:03 ` Hendrik Brueckner
2022-07-12 10:52 ` [PATCH 2/3] s390/cpufeature: allow for facility bits Steffen Eiden
2022-07-12 16:50 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-07-12 10:52 ` [PATCH 3/3] s390/uvdevice: autoload module based on CPU facility Steffen Eiden
2022-07-12 16:49 ` Claudio Imbrenda
2022-07-13 8:39 ` Steffen Eiden
2022-07-13 9:16 ` Claudio Imbrenda
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=Ys3Kt7nG2jtE8H3H@osiris \
--to=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nrb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
/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