----- On Jul 7, 2020, at 1:50 AM, Nicholas Piggin npig...@gmail.com wrote:

> Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of July 6, 2020 7:53 pm:
>> Le 06/07/2020 à 04:18, Nicholas Piggin a écrit :
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h
>>> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h
>>> index 47bd4ea0837d..b88cb3a989b6 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h
>>> @@ -68,6 +68,10 @@
>>>    *
>>>    * The nop instructions allow us to insert one or more instructions to 
>>> flush the
>>>    * L1-D cache when returning to userspace or a guest.
>>> + *
>>> + * powerpc relies on return from interrupt/syscall being context 
>>> synchronising
>>> + * (which hrfid, rfid, and rfscv are) to support 
>>> + * without additional additional synchronisation instructions.
>> This file is dedicated to BOOK3S/64. What about other ones ?
>> On 32 bits, this is also valid as 'rfi' is also context synchronising,
>> but then why just add some comment in exception-64s.h and only there ?
> Yeah you're right, I basically wanted to keep a note there just in case,
> because it's possible we would get a less synchronising return (maybe
> unlikely with meltdown) or even return from a kernel interrupt using a
> something faster (e.g., bctar if we don't use tar register in the kernel
> anywhere).
> So I wonder where to add the note, entry_32.S and 64e.h as well?

For 64-bit powerpc, I would be tempted to either place the comment in the header
implementing the RFI_TO_USER and RFI_TO_USER_OR_KERNEL macros or the .S files
using them, e.g. either:




And for 32-bit powerpc, AFAIU


uses SYNC + RFI to return to user-space. RFI is defined in


So a comment either near the RFI define and its uses should work.

> I should actually change the comment for 64-bit because soft masked
> interrupt replay is an interesting case. I thought it was okay (because
> the IPI would cause a hard interrupt which does do the rfi) but that
> should at least be written.


> The context synchronisation happens before
> the Linux IPI function is called, but for the purpose of membarrier I
> think that is okay (the membarrier just needs to have caused a memory
> barrier + context synchronistaion by the time it has done).

Can you point me to the code implementing this logic ?



> Thanks,
> Nick

Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.

Reply via email to