Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1698211 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-27 19:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-07-31 15:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [RFC v6 20/62] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-07-27 19:40 +0200
Re: [RFC v6 20/62] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> - 2017-07-30 01:40 +0200
Re: [RFC v6 20/62] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2017-07-31 15:10 +0200
| From | Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-27 19:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC v6 20/62] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches |
| Message-ID | <u7UVr-zr-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> writes: > Store and restore the AMR, IAMR and UMOR register state of the task > before scheduling out and after scheduling in, respectively. > > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> s/UMOR/UAMOR/ > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > index 2ad725e..9429361 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > @@ -1096,6 +1096,11 @@ static inline void save_sprs(struct thread_struct *t) > t->tar = mfspr(SPRN_TAR); > } > #endif > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > + t->amr = mfspr(SPRN_AMR); > + t->iamr = mfspr(SPRN_IAMR); > + t->uamor = mfspr(SPRN_UAMOR); > +#endif > } > > static inline void restore_sprs(struct thread_struct *old_thread, > @@ -1131,6 +1136,14 @@ static inline void restore_sprs(struct thread_struct *old_thread, > mtspr(SPRN_TAR, new_thread->tar); > } > #endif > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > + if (old_thread->amr != new_thread->amr) > + mtspr(SPRN_AMR, new_thread->amr); > + if (old_thread->iamr != new_thread->iamr) > + mtspr(SPRN_IAMR, new_thread->iamr); > + if (old_thread->uamor != new_thread->uamor) > + mtspr(SPRN_UAMOR, new_thread->uamor); > +#endif > } Shouldn't the saving and restoring of the SPRs be guarded by a check for whether memory protection keys are enabled? What happens when trying to access these registers on a CPU which doesn't have them? -- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-30 01:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [RFC v6 20/62] powerpc: store and restore the pkey state across context switches |
| Message-ID | <u8JuV-Nu-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1698211 |
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 02:32:59PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: > > Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> writes: > > > Store and restore the AMR, IAMR and UMOR register state of the task > > before scheduling out and after scheduling in, respectively. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> > > s/UMOR/UAMOR/ > > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > > index 2ad725e..9429361 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c > > @@ -1096,6 +1096,11 @@ static inline void save_sprs(struct thread_struct *t) > > t->tar = mfspr(SPRN_TAR); > > } > > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > > + t->amr = mfspr(SPRN_AMR); > > + t->iamr = mfspr(SPRN_IAMR); > > + t->uamor = mfspr(SPRN_UAMOR); > > +#endif > > } > > > > static inline void restore_sprs(struct thread_struct *old_thread, > > @@ -1131,6 +1136,14 @@ static inline void restore_sprs(struct thread_struct *old_thread, > > mtspr(SPRN_TAR, new_thread->tar); > > } > > #endif > > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS > > + if (old_thread->amr != new_thread->amr) > > + mtspr(SPRN_AMR, new_thread->amr); > > + if (old_thread->iamr != new_thread->iamr) > > + mtspr(SPRN_IAMR, new_thread->iamr); > > + if (old_thread->uamor != new_thread->uamor) > > + mtspr(SPRN_UAMOR, new_thread->uamor); > > +#endif > > } > > Shouldn't the saving and restoring of the SPRs be guarded by a check for > whether memory protection keys are enabled? What happens when trying to > access these registers on a CPU which doesn't have them? Good point. need to guard it. However; i think, these registers have been available since power6. RP
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-31 15:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u9iCm-6GI-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1699396 |
Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> writes: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 02:32:59PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com> writes: >> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c >> > index 2ad725e..9429361 100644 >> > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c >> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c >> > @@ -1096,6 +1096,11 @@ static inline void save_sprs(struct thread_struct *t) >> > t->tar = mfspr(SPRN_TAR); >> > } >> > #endif >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS >> > + t->amr = mfspr(SPRN_AMR); >> > + t->iamr = mfspr(SPRN_IAMR); >> > + t->uamor = mfspr(SPRN_UAMOR); >> > +#endif >> > } >> > >> > static inline void restore_sprs(struct thread_struct *old_thread, >> > @@ -1131,6 +1136,14 @@ static inline void restore_sprs(struct thread_struct *old_thread, >> > mtspr(SPRN_TAR, new_thread->tar); >> > } >> > #endif >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64_MEMORY_PROTECTION_KEYS >> > + if (old_thread->amr != new_thread->amr) >> > + mtspr(SPRN_AMR, new_thread->amr); >> > + if (old_thread->iamr != new_thread->iamr) >> > + mtspr(SPRN_IAMR, new_thread->iamr); >> > + if (old_thread->uamor != new_thread->uamor) >> > + mtspr(SPRN_UAMOR, new_thread->uamor); >> > +#endif >> > } >> >> Shouldn't the saving and restoring of the SPRs be guarded by a check for >> whether memory protection keys are enabled? What happens when trying to >> access these registers on a CPU which doesn't have them? > > Good point. need to guard it. However; i think, these registers have been > available since power6. The kernel runs on CPUs much older than that. IAMR was added on Power8. And performance is also an issue, so we should only switch them when we need to. cheers
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web