2024-06-13 19:16:48

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/6] RISC-V: Detect and report speed of unaligned vector accesses

Adds support for detecting and reporting the speed of unaligned vector
accesses on RISC-V CPUs. Adds vec_misaligned_speed key to the hwprobe
adds Zicclsm to cpufeature and fixes the check for scalar unaligned
emulated all CPUs. The vec_misaligned_speed key keeps the same format
as the scalar unaligned access speed key.

This set does not emulate unaligned vector accesses on CPUs that do not
support them. Only reports if userspace can run them and speed of
unaligned vector accesses if supported.

If Zicclsm is present, the kernel will set both scalar and vector unaligned access speed to FAST.

This patch requires the following patche to be applied first:
RISC-V: fix vector insn load/store width mask
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/

Jesse Taube (6):
RISC-V: Add Zicclsm to cpufeature and hwprobe
dt-bindings: riscv: Add Zicclsm ISA extension description.
RISC-V: Check scalar unaligned access on all CPUs
RISC-V: Detect unaligned vector accesses supported.
RISC-V: Report vector unaligned access speed hwprobe
RISC-V: hwprobe: Document unaligned vector perf key

Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst | 19 +++
.../devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | 7 +
arch/riscv/Kconfig | 59 +++++++
arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 7 +-
arch/riscv/include/asm/entry-common.h | 11 --
arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 1 +
arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h | 2 +-
arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h | 1 +
arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h | 6 +
arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile | 7 +-
arch/riscv/kernel/copy-unaligned.h | 5 +
arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c | 48 ++++++
arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c | 142 +++++++++++++---
arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c | 154 +++++++++++++++++-
arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S | 58 +++++++
arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c | 2 +-
17 files changed, 484 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S

--
2.43.0



2024-06-13 19:17:11

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/6] RISC-V: Add Zicclsm to cpufeature and hwprobe

> Zicclsm Misaligned loads and stores to main memory regions with both
> the cacheability and coherence PMAs must be supported.
> Note:
> This introduces a new extension name for this feature.
> This requires misaligned support for all regular load and store
> instructions (including scalar and vector) but not AMOs or other
> specialized forms of memory access. Even though mandated, misaligned
> loads and stores might execute extremely slowly. Standard software
> distributions should assume their existence only for correctness,
> not for performance.

Detecing zicclsm allows the kernel to report if the
hardware supports misaligned accesses even if support wasn't probed.

This is useful for usermode to know if vector misaligned accesses are
supported.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
---
V1 -> V2:
- Add documentation for Zicclsm
- Move Zicclsm to correct location
---
Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst | 3 +++
arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 1 +
arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h | 1 +
arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 1 +
arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c | 1 +
5 files changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst b/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst
index df5045103e73..7085a694b801 100644
--- a/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst
@@ -207,6 +207,9 @@ The following keys are defined:
* :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZVE64D`: The Vector sub-extension Zve64d is
supported, as defined by version 1.0 of the RISC-V Vector extension manual.

+ * :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZICCLSM`: The Zicclsm extension is supported as
+ defined in the RISC-V RVA Profiles Specification.
+
* :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_CPUPERF_0`: Deprecated. Returns similar values to
:c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_MISALIGNED_PERF`, but the key was mistakenly
classified as a bitmask rather than a value.
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
index f64d4e98e67c..0b3bd8885a2b 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
@@ -86,6 +86,7 @@
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZVE64X 77
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZVE64F 78
#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZVE64D 79
+#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM 80

#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_XLINUXENVCFG 127

diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
index 2fb8a8185e7a..023b7771d1b7 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
@@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ struct riscv_hwprobe {
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZVE64X (1ULL << 39)
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZVE64F (1ULL << 40)
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZVE64D (1ULL << 41)
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZICCLSM (1ULL << 42)
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_CPUPERF_0 5
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN (0 << 0)
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_EMULATED (1 << 0)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
index 1d6e4fda00f8..83c5ae16ad5e 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -283,6 +283,7 @@ const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(h, RISCV_ISA_EXT_h),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_SUPERSET(zicbom, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM, riscv_xlinuxenvcfg_exts),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_SUPERSET(zicboz, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ, riscv_xlinuxenvcfg_exts),
+ __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicclsm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicntr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICNTR),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicond, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICOND),
__RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicsr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR),
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
index e4ec9166339f..e910e2971984 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
@@ -96,6 +96,7 @@ static void hwprobe_isa_ext0(struct riscv_hwprobe *pair,
EXT_KEY(ZBB);
EXT_KEY(ZBS);
EXT_KEY(ZICBOZ);
+ EXT_KEY(ZICCLSM);
EXT_KEY(ZBC);

EXT_KEY(ZBKB);
--
2.43.0


2024-06-13 19:17:20

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/6] dt-bindings: riscv: Add Zicclsm ISA extension description.

Add description for Zicclsm ISA extension.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
---
V1 -> V2:
- New patch
---
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
index cfed80ad5540..9f6aae1f5b65 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
@@ -317,6 +317,13 @@ properties:
The standard Zicboz extension for cache-block zeroing as ratified
in commit 3dd606f ("Create cmobase-v1.0.pdf") of riscv-CMOs.

+ - const: zicclsm
+ description:
+ The standard Zicclsm extension for misaligned support for all regular
+ load and store instructions (including scalar and vector) but not AMOs
+ or other specialized forms of memory access. Defined in the
+ RISC-V RVA Profiles Specification.
+
- const: zicntr
description:
The standard Zicntr extension for base counters and timers, as
--
2.43.0


2024-06-13 19:20:00

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 4/6] RISC-V: Detect unaligned vector accesses supported.

Run a unaligned vector access to test if the system supports
vector unaligned access. Add the result to a new key in hwprobe.
This is useful for usermode to know if vector misaligned accesses are
supported and if they are faster or slower than equivalent byte accesses.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
---
V1 -> V2:
- Add Kconfig options
- Add insn_is_vector
- Add handle_vector_misaligned_load
- Fix build
- Seperate vector from scalar misaligned access
- This patch was almost completely rewritten
---
arch/riscv/Kconfig | 41 +++++++
arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 7 +-
arch/riscv/include/asm/entry-common.h | 11 --
arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h | 2 +-
arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h | 1 +
arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h | 5 +
arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile | 4 +-
arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c | 41 +++++++
arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c | 119 ++++++++++++++++++++-
arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c | 9 +-
arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c | 2 +-
11 files changed, 221 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
index b94176e25be1..f12df0ca6c18 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
@@ -723,6 +723,12 @@ config RISCV_MISALIGNED
help
Embed support for emulating misaligned loads and stores.

+config RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+ bool
+ depends on RISCV_ISA_V
+ help
+ Enable detecting support for vector misaligned loads and stores.
+
choice
prompt "Unaligned Accesses Support"
default RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
@@ -774,6 +780,41 @@ config RISCV_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS

endchoice

+choice
+ prompt "Vector unaligned Accesses Support"
+ depends on RISCV_ISA_V
+ default RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ help
+ This determines the level of support for vector unaligned accesses. This
+ information is used by the kernel to perform optimizations. It is also
+ exposed to user space via the hwprobe syscall. The hardware will be
+ probed at boot by default.
+
+config RISCV_DETECT_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ bool "Detect support for vector unaligned accesses"
+ select RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+ help
+ During boot, the kernel will detect if the system supports vector
+ unaligned accesses.
+
+config RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ bool "Probe speed of vector unaligned accesses"
+ select RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+ help
+ During boot, the kernel will run a series of tests to determine the
+ speed of vector unaligned accesses if they are supported. This probing
+ will dynamically determine the speed of vector unaligned accesses on
+ the underlying system if they are supported.
+
+config CONFIG_RISCV_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_UNSUPPORTED
+ bool "Assume the system does not support vector unaligned memory accesses"
+ help
+ Assume that the system does not support vector unaligned memory accesses.
+ The kernel and userspace programs may run them successfully on systems
+ that do support vector unaligned memory accesses.
+
+endchoice
+
endmenu # "Platform type"

menu "Kernel features"
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
index 347805446151..d0ea5921ab20 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/cpufeature.h
@@ -33,8 +33,8 @@ extern struct riscv_isainfo hart_isa[NR_CPUS];

void riscv_user_isa_enable(void);

-#if defined(CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED)
bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void);
+#if defined(CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED)
void unaligned_emulation_finish(void);
bool unaligned_ctl_available(void);
DECLARE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed);
@@ -45,6 +45,11 @@ static inline bool unaligned_ctl_available(void)
}
#endif

+bool check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void);
+#if defined(CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED)
+DECLARE_PER_CPU(long, vector_misaligned_access);
+#endif
+
#if defined(CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
DECLARE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(fast_unaligned_access_speed_key);

diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/entry-common.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/entry-common.h
index 2293e535f865..7b32d2b08bb6 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/entry-common.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/entry-common.h
@@ -25,18 +25,7 @@ static inline void arch_exit_to_user_mode_prepare(struct pt_regs *regs,
void handle_page_fault(struct pt_regs *regs);
void handle_break(struct pt_regs *regs);

-#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
int handle_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs);
int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs);
-#else
-static inline int handle_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
-{
- return -1;
-}
-static inline int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
-{
- return -1;
-}
-#endif

#endif /* _ASM_RISCV_ENTRY_COMMON_H */
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
index 150a9877b0af..ef01c182af2b 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@

#include <uapi/asm/hwprobe.h>

-#define RISCV_HWPROBE_MAX_KEY 7
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_MAX_KEY 8

static inline bool riscv_hwprobe_key_is_valid(__s64 key)
{
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h
index be7d309cca8a..99b0f91db9ee 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@

extern unsigned long riscv_v_vsize;
int riscv_v_setup_vsize(void);
+bool insn_is_vector(u32 insn_buf);
bool riscv_v_first_use_handler(struct pt_regs *regs);
void kernel_vector_begin(void);
void kernel_vector_end(void);
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
index 023b7771d1b7..2fee870e41bb 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/uapi/asm/hwprobe.h
@@ -75,6 +75,11 @@ struct riscv_hwprobe {
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_MASK (7 << 0)
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_ZICBOZ_BLOCK_SIZE 6
#define RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_MISALIGNED_PERF 7
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_VEC_MISALIGNED_PERF 8
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN 0
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_SLOW 2
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST 3
+#define RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED 4
/* Increase RISCV_HWPROBE_MAX_KEY when adding items. */

/* Flags */
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile b/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
index 5b243d46f4b1..62ac19c029f1 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
@@ -62,8 +62,8 @@ obj-y += probes/
obj-y += tests/
obj-$(CONFIG_MMU) += vdso.o vdso/

-obj-$(CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED) += traps_misaligned.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED) += unaligned_access_speed.o
+obj-y += traps_misaligned.o
+obj-y += unaligned_access_speed.o
obj-$(CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) += copy-unaligned.o

obj-$(CONFIG_FPU) += fpu.o
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
index e910e2971984..c40df314058b 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
@@ -194,6 +194,43 @@ static u64 hwprobe_misaligned(const struct cpumask *cpus)
}
#endif

+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+static u64 hwprobe_vec_misaligned(const struct cpumask *cpus)
+{
+ int cpu;
+ u64 perf = -1ULL;
+
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_UNSUPPORTED))
+ return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
+
+ /* Return if supported or not even if speed wasn't probed */
+ for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
+ int this_perf = per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu);
+
+ if (perf == -1ULL)
+ perf = this_perf;
+
+ if (perf != this_perf) {
+ perf = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+
+ if (perf == -1ULL)
+ return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
+
+ return perf;
+}
+#else
+static u64 hwprobe_vec_misaligned(const struct cpumask *cpus)
+{
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_UNSUPPORTED))
+ return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
+
+ return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
+}
+#endif
+
static void hwprobe_one_pair(struct riscv_hwprobe *pair,
const struct cpumask *cpus)
{
@@ -222,6 +259,10 @@ static void hwprobe_one_pair(struct riscv_hwprobe *pair,
pair->value = hwprobe_misaligned(cpus);
break;

+ case RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_VEC_MISALIGNED_PERF:
+ pair->value = hwprobe_vec_misaligned(cpus);
+ break;
+
case RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_ZICBOZ_BLOCK_SIZE:
pair->value = 0;
if (hwprobe_ext0_has(cpus, RISCV_HWPROBE_EXT_ZICBOZ))
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
index 8fadbe00dd62..6f0264a8c9de 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
#include <asm/entry-common.h>
#include <asm/hwprobe.h>
#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
+#include <asm/vector.h>

#define INSN_MATCH_LB 0x3
#define INSN_MASK_LB 0x707f
@@ -322,12 +323,37 @@ union reg_data {
u64 data_u64;
};

-static bool unaligned_ctl __read_mostly;
-
/* sysctl hooks */
int unaligned_enabled __read_mostly = 1; /* Enabled by default */

-int handle_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+static int handle_vector_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ unsigned long epc = regs->epc;
+ unsigned long insn;
+
+ if (get_insn(regs, epc, &insn))
+ return -1;
+
+ /* Only return 0 when in check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated */
+ if (*this_cpu_ptr(&vector_misaligned_access) == RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN) {
+ *this_cpu_ptr(&vector_misaligned_access) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
+ regs->epc = epc + INSN_LEN(insn);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ /* If vector instruction we don't emulate it yet */
+ regs->epc = epc;
+ return -1;
+}
+#else
+static int handle_vector_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ return -1;
+}
+#endif
+
+static int handle_scalar_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
union reg_data val;
unsigned long epc = regs->epc;
@@ -435,7 +461,7 @@ int handle_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
return 0;
}

-int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
+static int handle_scalar_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
{
union reg_data val;
unsigned long epc = regs->epc;
@@ -526,6 +552,85 @@ int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
return 0;
}

+int handle_misaligned_load(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ unsigned long epc = regs->epc;
+ unsigned long insn;
+
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED)) {
+ if (get_insn(regs, epc, &insn))
+ return -1;
+
+ if (insn_is_vector(insn))
+ return handle_vector_misaligned_load(regs);
+ }
+
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED))
+ return handle_scalar_misaligned_load(regs);
+
+ return -1;
+}
+
+int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED))
+ return handle_scalar_misaligned_store(regs);
+
+ return -1;
+}
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+static void check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated(struct work_struct *unused)
+{
+ long *mas_ptr = this_cpu_ptr(&vector_misaligned_access);
+ unsigned long tmp_var;
+
+ *mas_ptr = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
+
+ local_irq_enable();
+ kernel_vector_begin();
+ __asm__ __volatile__ (
+ ".balign 4\n\t"
+ ".option push\n\t"
+ ".option arch, +zve32x\n\t"
+ " vsetivli zero, 1, e16, m1, ta, ma\n\t" // Vectors of 16b
+ " vle16.v v0, (%[ptr])\n\t" // Load bytes
+ ".option pop\n\t"
+ : : [ptr] "r" ((u8 *)&tmp_var + 1) : "v0");
+ kernel_vector_end();
+}
+
+bool check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
+{
+ int cpu;
+ bool ret = true;
+
+ if (!has_vector()) {
+ for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
+ per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ schedule_on_each_cpu(check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated);
+
+ for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
+ if (per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu)
+ != RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_SLOW)
+ return false;
+
+ return ret;
+}
+#else
+bool check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+#endif
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
+
+static bool unaligned_ctl __read_mostly;
+
static void check_unaligned_access_emulated(struct work_struct *unused)
{
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
@@ -563,3 +668,9 @@ bool unaligned_ctl_available(void)
{
return unaligned_ctl;
}
+#else
+bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
+{
+ return false;
+}
+#endif
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
index 70c1588fc353..c6106bd4a25a 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
@@ -19,7 +19,8 @@
#define MISALIGNED_BUFFER_ORDER get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE)
#define MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE ((MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2) - 0x80)

-DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed);
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, vector_misaligned_access) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;

#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
static cpumask_t fast_misaligned_access;
@@ -268,12 +269,18 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)

if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
+ per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
+#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
+#endif
}
return 0;
}

all_cpus_emulated = check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
+ check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();

#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
if (!all_cpus_emulated)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c
index 682b3feee451..821818886fab 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c
@@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ void __init riscv_v_setup_ctx_cache(void)
#endif
}

-static bool insn_is_vector(u32 insn_buf)
+bool insn_is_vector(u32 insn_buf)
{
u32 opcode = insn_buf & __INSN_OPCODE_MASK;
u32 width, csr;
--
2.43.0


2024-06-13 19:20:13

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/6] RISC-V: Check scalar unaligned access on all CPUs

Originally, the check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus function
only checked the boot hart. This fixes the function to check all
harts.

Check for Zicclsm before checking for unaligned access. This will
greatly reduce the boot up time as finding the access speed is no longer
necessary.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
---
V1 -> V2:
- New patch
---
arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c | 23 ++++++----------------
arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c | 23 +++++++++++++---------
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
index b62d5a2f4541..8fadbe00dd62 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
@@ -526,31 +526,17 @@ int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
return 0;
}

-static bool check_unaligned_access_emulated(int cpu)
+static void check_unaligned_access_emulated(struct work_struct *unused)
{
+ int cpu = smp_processor_id();
long *mas_ptr = per_cpu_ptr(&misaligned_access_speed, cpu);
unsigned long tmp_var, tmp_val;
- bool misaligned_emu_detected;

*mas_ptr = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;

__asm__ __volatile__ (
" "REG_L" %[tmp], 1(%[ptr])\n"
: [tmp] "=r" (tmp_val) : [ptr] "r" (&tmp_var) : "memory");
-
- misaligned_emu_detected = (*mas_ptr == RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_EMULATED);
- /*
- * If unaligned_ctl is already set, this means that we detected that all
- * CPUS uses emulated misaligned access at boot time. If that changed
- * when hotplugging the new cpu, this is something we don't handle.
- */
- if (unlikely(unaligned_ctl && !misaligned_emu_detected)) {
- pr_crit("CPU misaligned accesses non homogeneous (expected all emulated)\n");
- while (true)
- cpu_relax();
- }
-
- return misaligned_emu_detected;
}

bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
@@ -562,8 +548,11 @@ bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
* accesses emulated since tasks requesting such control can run on any
* CPU.
*/
+ schedule_on_each_cpu(check_unaligned_access_emulated);
+
for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
- if (!check_unaligned_access_emulated(cpu))
+ if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu)
+ != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_EMULATED)
return false;

unaligned_ctl = true;
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
index a9a6bcb02acf..70c1588fc353 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
@@ -259,23 +259,28 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus(void)
kfree(bufs);
return 0;
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS */

static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
{
- bool all_cpus_emulated = check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
+ bool all_cpus_emulated;
+ int cpu;

+ if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
+ for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
+ per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
+ }
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ all_cpus_emulated = check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
if (!all_cpus_emulated)
return check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus();
+#endif

return 0;
}
-#else /* CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS */
-static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
-{
- check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
-
- return 0;
-}
-#endif

arch_initcall(check_unaligned_access_all_cpus);
--
2.43.0


2024-06-13 19:22:20

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 6/6] RISC-V: hwprobe: Document unaligned vector perf key

Document key for reporting the speed of unaligned vector accesses.
The descriptions are the same as the scalar equivalent values.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
---
V1 -> V2:
- New patch
---
Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst | 16 ++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst b/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst
index 7085a694b801..344bea1e21bd 100644
--- a/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst
+++ b/Documentation/arch/riscv/hwprobe.rst
@@ -236,3 +236,19 @@ The following keys are defined:

* :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_ZICBOZ_BLOCK_SIZE`: An unsigned int which
represents the size of the Zicboz block in bytes.
+
+* :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_VEC_MISALIGNED_PERF`: An enum value describing the
+ performance of misaligned vector accesses on the selected set of processors.
+
+ * :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN`: The performance of misaligned
+ accesses is unknown.
+
+ * :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_SLOW`: Misaligned accesses are slower
+ than equivalent byte accesses. Misaligned accesses may be supported
+ directly in hardware, or trapped and emulated by software.
+
+ * :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST`: Misaligned accesses are faster
+ than equivalent byte accesses.
+
+ * :c:macro:`RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED`: Misaligned accesses are
+ not supported at all and will generate a misaligned address fault.
--
2.43.0


2024-06-13 19:22:30

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH v2 5/6] RISC-V: Report vector unaligned access speed hwprobe

Detect if vector misaligned accesses are faster or slower than
equivalent vector byte accesses. This is useful for usermode to know
whether vector byte accesses or vector misaligned accesses have a better
bandwidth for operations like memcpy.

Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
---
V1 -> V2:
- Add Kconfig options
- Add WORD_EEW to vec-copy-unaligned.S
---
arch/riscv/Kconfig | 18 +++
arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile | 3 +-
arch/riscv/kernel/copy-unaligned.h | 5 +
arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c | 6 +
arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c | 130 ++++++++++++++++++++-
arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S | 58 +++++++++
6 files changed, 217 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S

diff --git a/arch/riscv/Kconfig b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
index f12df0ca6c18..b181b35f37ca 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/riscv/Kconfig
@@ -813,6 +813,24 @@ config CONFIG_RISCV_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_UNSUPPORTED
The kernel and userspace programs may run them successfully on systems
that do support vector unaligned memory accesses.

+config RISCV_SLOW_VEC_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ bool "Assume the system supports slow vector unaligned memory accesses"
+ depends on NONPORTABLE
+ help
+ Assume that the system supports slow vector unaligned memory accesses. The
+ kernel and userspace programs may not be able to run at all on systems
+ that do not support unaligned memory accesses.
+
+config RISCV_EFFICIENT_VEC_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ bool "Assume the system supports fast vector unaligned memory accesses"
+ depends on NONPORTABLE
+ help
+ Assume that the system supports fast vector unaligned memory accesses. When
+ enabled, this option improves the performance of the kernel on such
+ systems. However, the kernel and userspace programs will run much more
+ slowly, or will not be able to run at all, on systems that do not
+ support efficient unaligned memory accesses.
+
endchoice

endmenu # "Platform type"
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile b/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
index 62ac19c029f1..c4d6f54705a4 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile
@@ -64,7 +64,8 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_MMU) += vdso.o vdso/

obj-y += traps_misaligned.o
obj-y += unaligned_access_speed.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) += copy-unaligned.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) += copy-unaligned.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) += vec-copy-unaligned.o

obj-$(CONFIG_FPU) += fpu.o
obj-$(CONFIG_FPU) += kernel_mode_fpu.o
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/copy-unaligned.h b/arch/riscv/kernel/copy-unaligned.h
index e3d70d35b708..85d4d11450cb 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/copy-unaligned.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/copy-unaligned.h
@@ -10,4 +10,9 @@
void __riscv_copy_words_unaligned(void *dst, const void *src, size_t size);
void __riscv_copy_bytes_unaligned(void *dst, const void *src, size_t size);

+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+void __riscv_copy_vec_words_unaligned(void *dst, const void *src, size_t size);
+void __riscv_copy_vec_bytes_unaligned(void *dst, const void *src, size_t size);
+#endif
+
#endif /* __RISCV_KERNEL_COPY_UNALIGNED_H */
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
index c40df314058b..1679db4fe360 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/sys_hwprobe.c
@@ -203,6 +203,12 @@ static u64 hwprobe_vec_misaligned(const struct cpumask *cpus)
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_UNALIGNED_ACCESS_UNSUPPORTED))
return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;

+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_EFFICIENT_VEC_UNALIGNED_ACCESS))
+ return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
+
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RISCV_SLOW_VEC_UNALIGNED_ACCESS))
+ return RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_SLOW;
+
/* Return if supported or not even if speed wasn't probed */
for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
int this_perf = per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu);
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
index c6106bd4a25a..ddc49cce54e3 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
@@ -8,9 +8,11 @@
#include <linux/jump_label.h>
#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <linux/smp.h>
+#include <linux/kthread.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
#include <asm/hwprobe.h>
+#include <asm/vector.h>

#include "copy-unaligned.h"

@@ -262,9 +264,126 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus(void)
}
#endif /* CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS */

+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+static void check_vector_unaligned_access(struct work_struct *unused)
+{
+ int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+ u64 start_cycles, end_cycles;
+ u64 word_cycles;
+ u64 byte_cycles;
+ int ratio;
+ unsigned long start_jiffies, now;
+ struct page *page;
+ void *dst;
+ void *src;
+ long speed = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_SLOW;
+
+ if (per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) != RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_SLOW)
+ return;
+
+ page = alloc_pages(GFP_KERNEL, MISALIGNED_BUFFER_ORDER);
+ if (!page) {
+ pr_warn("Allocation failure, not measuring vector misaligned performance\n");
+ return;
+ }
+
+ /* Make an unaligned destination buffer. */
+ dst = (void *)((unsigned long)page_address(page) | 0x1);
+ /* Unalign src as well, but differently (off by 1 + 2 = 3). */
+ src = dst + (MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2);
+ src += 2;
+ word_cycles = -1ULL;
+
+ /* Do a warmup. */
+ local_irq_enable();
+ kernel_vector_begin();
+ __riscv_copy_vec_words_unaligned(dst, src, MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE);
+
+ start_jiffies = jiffies;
+ while ((now = jiffies) == start_jiffies)
+ cpu_relax();
+
+ /*
+ * For a fixed amount of time, repeatedly try the function, and take
+ * the best time in cycles as the measurement.
+ */
+ while (time_before(jiffies, now + (1 << MISALIGNED_ACCESS_JIFFIES_LG2))) {
+ start_cycles = get_cycles64();
+ /* Ensure the CSR read can't reorder WRT to the copy. */
+ mb();
+ __riscv_copy_vec_words_unaligned(dst, src, MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE);
+ /* Ensure the copy ends before the end time is snapped. */
+ mb();
+ end_cycles = get_cycles64();
+ if ((end_cycles - start_cycles) < word_cycles)
+ word_cycles = end_cycles - start_cycles;
+ }
+
+ byte_cycles = -1ULL;
+ __riscv_copy_vec_bytes_unaligned(dst, src, MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE);
+ start_jiffies = jiffies;
+ while ((now = jiffies) == start_jiffies)
+ cpu_relax();
+
+ while (time_before(jiffies, now + (1 << MISALIGNED_ACCESS_JIFFIES_LG2))) {
+ start_cycles = get_cycles64();
+ mb();
+ __riscv_copy_vec_bytes_unaligned(dst, src, MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE);
+ mb();
+ end_cycles = get_cycles64();
+ if ((end_cycles - start_cycles) < byte_cycles)
+ byte_cycles = end_cycles - start_cycles;
+ }
+
+ kernel_vector_end();
+
+ /* Don't divide by zero. */
+ if (!word_cycles || !byte_cycles) {
+ pr_warn("cpu%d: rdtime lacks granularity needed to measure unaligned vector access speed\n",
+ cpu);
+
+ return;
+ }
+
+ if (word_cycles < byte_cycles)
+ speed = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
+
+ ratio = div_u64((byte_cycles * 100), word_cycles);
+ pr_info("cpu%d: Ratio of vector byte access time to vector unaligned word access is %d.%02d, unaligned accesses are %s\n",
+ cpu,
+ ratio / 100,
+ ratio % 100,
+ (speed == RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST) ? "fast" : "slow");
+
+ per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = speed;
+}
+
+static int riscv_online_cpu_vec(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ check_vector_unaligned_access(NULL);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+/* Measure unaligned access speed on all CPUs present at boot in parallel. */
+static int vec_check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus(void *unused)
+{
+ /* Schecudles work que*/
+ schedule_on_each_cpu(check_vector_unaligned_access);
+
+ /*
+ * Setup hotplug callbacks for any new CPUs that come online or go
+ * offline.
+ */
+ cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN, "riscv:online",
+ riscv_online_cpu_vec, NULL);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS */
+
static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
{
- bool all_cpus_emulated;
+ bool all_cpus_emulated, all_cpus_vec_supported;
int cpu;

if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
@@ -280,7 +399,14 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
}

all_cpus_emulated = check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
- check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
+ all_cpus_vec_supported = check_vector_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_VECTOR_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ if (all_cpus_vec_supported) {
+ kthread_run(vec_check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus,
+ NULL, "vec_check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus");
+ }
+#endif

#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
if (!all_cpus_emulated)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S b/arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..e5bc94917e60
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/vec-copy-unaligned.S
@@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+/* Copyright (C) 2024 Rivos Inc. */
+
+#include <linux/linkage.h>
+#include <asm/asm.h>
+#include <linux/args.h>
+
+ .text
+
+#define WORD_EEW 32
+
+#define WORD_SEW CONCATENATE(e, WORD_EEW)
+#define VEC_L CONCATENATE(vle, WORD_EEW).v
+#define VEC_S CONCATENATE(vle, WORD_EEW).v
+
+/* void __riscv_copy_vec_words_unaligned(void *, const void *, size_t) */
+/* Performs a memcpy without aligning buffers, using word loads and stores. */
+/* Note: The size is truncated to a multiple of WORD_EEW */
+SYM_FUNC_START(__riscv_copy_vec_words_unaligned)
+ andi a4, a2, ~(WORD_EEW-1)
+ beqz a4, 2f
+ add a3, a1, a4
+ .option push
+ .option arch, +zve32x
+1:
+ vsetivli t0, 8, WORD_SEW, m8, ta, ma
+ VEC_L v0, (a1)
+ VEC_S v0, (a0)
+ addi a0, a0, WORD_EEW
+ addi a1, a1, WORD_EEW
+ bltu a1, a3, 1b
+
+2:
+ .option pop
+ ret
+SYM_FUNC_END(__riscv_copy_vec_words_unaligned)
+
+/* void __riscv_copy_vec_bytes_unaligned(void *, const void *, size_t) */
+/* Performs a memcpy without aligning buffers, using only byte accesses. */
+/* Note: The size is truncated to a multiple of 8 */
+SYM_FUNC_START(__riscv_copy_vec_bytes_unaligned)
+ andi a4, a2, ~(8-1)
+ beqz a4, 2f
+ add a3, a1, a4
+ .option push
+ .option arch, +zve32x
+1:
+ vsetivli t0, 8, e8, m8, ta, ma
+ vle8.v v0, (a1)
+ vse8.v v0, (a0)
+ addi a0, a0, 8
+ addi a1, a1, 8
+ bltu a1, a3, 1b
+
+2:
+ .option pop
+ ret
+SYM_FUNC_END(__riscv_copy_vec_bytes_unaligned)
--
2.43.0


2024-06-14 08:08:08

by Conor Dooley

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] dt-bindings: riscv: Add Zicclsm ISA extension description.

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:11PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
> Add description for Zicclsm ISA extension.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
> ---
> V1 -> V2:
> - New patch
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
> index cfed80ad5540..9f6aae1f5b65 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
> @@ -317,6 +317,13 @@ properties:
> The standard Zicboz extension for cache-block zeroing as ratified
> in commit 3dd606f ("Create cmobase-v1.0.pdf") of riscv-CMOs.
>
> + - const: zicclsm
> + description:
> + The standard Zicclsm extension for misaligned support for all regular
> + load and store instructions (including scalar and vector) but not AMOs
> + or other specialized forms of memory access. Defined in the
> + RISC-V RVA Profiles Specification.

Acked-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]>

> +
> - const: zicntr
> description:
> The standard Zicntr extension for base counters and timers, as
> --
> 2.43.0
>


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.36 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2024-06-14 08:12:41

by Conor Dooley

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] RISC-V: Add Zicclsm to cpufeature and hwprobe

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:10PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
> > Zicclsm Misaligned loads and stores to main memory regions with both
> > the cacheability and coherence PMAs must be supported.
> > Note:
> > This introduces a new extension name for this feature.
> > This requires misaligned support for all regular load and store
> > instructions (including scalar and vector) but not AMOs or other
> > specialized forms of memory access. Even though mandated, misaligned
> > loads and stores might execute extremely slowly. Standard software
> > distributions should assume their existence only for correctness,
> > not for performance.
>
> Detecing zicclsm allows the kernel to report if the
> hardware supports misaligned accesses even if support wasn't probed.
>
> This is useful for usermode to know if vector misaligned accesses are
> supported.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>

Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <[email protected]>


Attachments:
(No filename) (984.00 B)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2024-06-14 08:24:55

by Conor Dooley

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] RISC-V: Check scalar unaligned access on all CPUs

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:12PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
> Originally, the check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus function
> only checked the boot hart. This fixes the function to check all
> harts.

This seems like it should be split out and get a Fixes: tag & a cc:
stable.

> Check for Zicclsm before checking for unaligned access. This will
> greatly reduce the boot up time as finding the access speed is no longer
> necessary.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Taube <[email protected]>
> ---
> V1 -> V2:
> - New patch
> ---
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c | 23 ++++++----------------
> arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c | 23 +++++++++++++---------
> 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
> index b62d5a2f4541..8fadbe00dd62 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
> @@ -526,31 +526,17 @@ int handle_misaligned_store(struct pt_regs *regs)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static bool check_unaligned_access_emulated(int cpu)
> +static void check_unaligned_access_emulated(struct work_struct *unused)
> {
> + int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> long *mas_ptr = per_cpu_ptr(&misaligned_access_speed, cpu);
> unsigned long tmp_var, tmp_val;
> - bool misaligned_emu_detected;
>
> *mas_ptr = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
>
> __asm__ __volatile__ (
> " "REG_L" %[tmp], 1(%[ptr])\n"
> : [tmp] "=r" (tmp_val) : [ptr] "r" (&tmp_var) : "memory");
> -
> - misaligned_emu_detected = (*mas_ptr == RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_EMULATED);
> - /*
> - * If unaligned_ctl is already set, this means that we detected that all
> - * CPUS uses emulated misaligned access at boot time. If that changed
> - * when hotplugging the new cpu, this is something we don't handle.
> - */
> - if (unlikely(unaligned_ctl && !misaligned_emu_detected)) {
> - pr_crit("CPU misaligned accesses non homogeneous (expected all emulated)\n");
> - while (true)
> - cpu_relax();
> - }
> -
> - return misaligned_emu_detected;
> }
>
> bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
> @@ -562,8 +548,11 @@ bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
> * accesses emulated since tasks requesting such control can run on any
> * CPU.
> */
> + schedule_on_each_cpu(check_unaligned_access_emulated);
> +
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> - if (!check_unaligned_access_emulated(cpu))
> + if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu)
> + != RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_EMULATED)
> return false;
>
> unaligned_ctl = true;
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> index a9a6bcb02acf..70c1588fc353 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> @@ -259,23 +259,28 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus(void)
> kfree(bufs);
> return 0;
> }
> +#endif /* CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS */
>
> static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
> {
> - bool all_cpus_emulated = check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
> + bool all_cpus_emulated;
> + int cpu;
>
> + if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> + per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> + }
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + all_cpus_emulated = check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS

Can we make this an IS_ENABLED() please?


Thanks,
Conor.

> if (!all_cpus_emulated)
> return check_unaligned_access_speed_all_cpus();
> +#endif
>
> return 0;
> }
> -#else /* CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS */
> -static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
> -{
> - check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus();
> -
> - return 0;
> -}
> -#endif
>
> arch_initcall(check_unaligned_access_all_cpus);
> --
> 2.43.0
>


Attachments:
(No filename) (4.00 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2024-06-14 08:37:44

by Conor Dooley

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] RISC-V: Detect unaligned vector accesses supported.

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:13PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@
> #define MISALIGNED_BUFFER_ORDER get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE)
> #define MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE ((MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2) - 0x80)
>
> -DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed);
> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, vector_misaligned_access) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
> static cpumask_t fast_misaligned_access;
> @@ -268,12 +269,18 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
>
> if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
> + per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
> per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> +#endif

Can you IS_ENABLED()-ify these two as well please?


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.12 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2024-06-14 08:41:30

by Conor Dooley

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] RISC-V: Detect unaligned vector accesses supported.

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 09:36:55AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:13PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> > @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@
> > #define MISALIGNED_BUFFER_ORDER get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE)
> > #define MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE ((MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2) - 0x80)
> >
> > -DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed);
> > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
> > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, vector_misaligned_access) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
> > static cpumask_t fast_misaligned_access;
> > @@ -268,12 +269,18 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
> >
> > if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
> > for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
> > + per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> > +#endif
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
> > per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> > +#endif
>
> Can you IS_ENABLED()-ify these two as well please?

Ah, you can't cos the variable doesn't exist in the other case.


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.30 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments

2024-06-14 14:30:49

by Jesse Taube

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] RISC-V: Detect unaligned vector accesses supported.



On 6/14/24 04:40, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 09:36:55AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:13PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
>>> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
>>> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
>>> @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@
>>> #define MISALIGNED_BUFFER_ORDER get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE)
>>> #define MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE ((MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2) - 0x80)
>>>
>>> -DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed);
>>> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
>>> +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, vector_misaligned_access) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
>>>
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
>>> static cpumask_t fast_misaligned_access;
>>> @@ -268,12 +269,18 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
>>>
>>> if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
>>> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
>>> + per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
>>> +#endif
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
>>> per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
>>> +#endif
>>
>> Can you IS_ENABLED()-ify these two as well please?
>
> Ah, you can't cos the variable doesn't exist in the other case.

Yeah kinda just dealing with how it was originally written ideally we
would use IS_ENABLED. I don't really want to have a 500+ diff patch
IS_ENABLED()-ifying the original code as well. I can do that if
necessary though.

Thank,
Jesse Taube

2024-06-14 14:32:27

by Conor Dooley

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] RISC-V: Detect unaligned vector accesses supported.

On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 10:28:17AM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
>
>
> On 6/14/24 04:40, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 09:36:55AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:16:13PM -0400, Jesse Taube wrote:
> > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/unaligned_access_speed.c
> > > > @@ -19,7 +19,8 @@
> > > > #define MISALIGNED_BUFFER_ORDER get_order(MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE)
> > > > #define MISALIGNED_COPY_SIZE ((MISALIGNED_BUFFER_SIZE / 2) - 0x80)
> > > > -DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed);
> > > > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, misaligned_access_speed) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_UNKNOWN;
> > > > +DEFINE_PER_CPU(long, vector_misaligned_access) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_UNSUPPORTED;
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_PROBE_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
> > > > static cpumask_t fast_misaligned_access;
> > > > @@ -268,12 +269,18 @@ static int check_unaligned_access_all_cpus(void)
> > > > if (riscv_has_extension_unlikely(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICCLSM)) {
> > > > for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_VECTOR_MISALIGNED
> > > > + per_cpu(vector_misaligned_access, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_VEC_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> > > > +#endif
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_MISALIGNED
> > > > per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) = RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_FAST;
> > > > +#endif
> > >
> > > Can you IS_ENABLED()-ify these two as well please?
> >
> > Ah, you can't cos the variable doesn't exist in the other case.
>
> Yeah kinda just dealing with how it was originally written ideally we would
> use IS_ENABLED. I don't really want to have a 500+ diff patch
> IS_ENABLED()-ifying the original code as well. I can do that if necessary
> though.

No, dw about it. I made a mistake.


Attachments:
(No filename) (1.76 kB)
signature.asc (235.00 B)
Download all attachments