Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1706902
| From | Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] [RFC] tpm_tis: tpm_tcg_flush() after iowrite*()s |
| Date | 2017-08-09 00:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uckHF-64i-37@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <uaSNr-47E-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <ubRFF-1cv-43@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo |
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 09:59:35AM -0500, Julia Cartwright wrote: > On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 04:56:51PM -0500, Haris Okanovic wrote: > > I have a latency issue using a SPI-based TPM chip with tpm_tis driver > > from non-rt usermode application, which induces ~400 us latency spikes > > in cyclictest (Intel Atom E3940 system, PREEMPT_RT_FULL kernel). > > > > The spikes are caused by a stalling ioread8() operation, following a > > sequence of 30+ iowrite8()s to the same address. I believe this happens > > because the writes are cached (in cpu or somewhere along the bus), which > > gets flushed on the first LOAD instruction (ioread*()) that follows. > > To use the ARM parlance, these accesses aren't "cached" (which would > imply that a result could be returned to the load from any intermediate > node in the interconnect), but instead are "bufferable". > > It is really unfortunate that we continue to run into this class of > problem across various CPU vendors and various underlying bus > technologies; it's the continuing curse of running an PREEMPT_RT on > commodity hardware. RT is not easy :) > > > The enclosed change appears to fix this issue: read the TPM chip's > > access register (status code) after every iowrite*() operation. > > Are we engaged in a game of wack-a-mole with all of the drivers which > use this same access pattern (of which I imagine there are quite a > few!)? > > I'm wondering if we should explore the idea of adding a load in the > iowriteN()/writeX() macros (marking those accesses in which reads cause > side effects explicitly, redirecting to a _raw() variant or something). > > Obviously that would be expensive for non-RT use cases, but for helping > constrain latency, it may be worth it for RT. > > Julia What if we as quick resort we add tpm_tis_iowrite8() to the TPM driver. Would be easy to move to iowrite8() if the problem is sorted out there later on. /Jarkko
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] [RFC] tpm_tis: tpm_tcg_flush() after iowrite*()s Haris Okanovic <haris.okanovic@ni.com> - 2017-08-05 00:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] [RFC] tpm_tis: tpm_tcg_flush() after iowrite*()s Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com> - 2017-08-07 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH] [RFC] tpm_tis: tpm_tcg_flush() after iowrite*()s Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-08-09 00:00 +0200
csiph-web