Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190805211451.20176-1-robdclark@gmail.com> <20190806084821.GA17129@lst.de>
 <CAJs_Fx6eh1w7c=crMoD5XyEOMzP6orLhqUewErE51cPGYmObBQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190806143457.GF475@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> <CAJs_Fx4h6SWGmDTLBnV4nmWUFAs_Ge1inxd-dW9aDKgKqmc1eQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190807123807.GD54191@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> <CAJs_Fx5xU2-dn3iOVqWTzAjpTaQ8BBNP_Gn_iMc-eJpOX+iXoQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190807164958.GA44765@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190807164958.GA44765@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>
From:   Rob Clark <robdclark@chromium.org>
Date:   Wed, 7 Aug 2019 10:30:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAJs_Fx71T=kJEgt28TWqzw+jOahSbLQynCg83+szQW7op4xBkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm: add cache support for arm64
To:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Rob Clark <robdclark@gmail.com>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@poorly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@linux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
        Allison Randal <allison@lohutok.net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 9:50 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 09:15:54AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 5:38 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 09:31:55AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 7:35 AM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 07:11:41AM -0700, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:48 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This goes in the wrong direction.  drm_cflush_* are a bad API we need to
> > > > > > > get rid of, not add use of it.  The reason for that is two-fold:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  a) it doesn't address how cache maintaince actually works in most
> > > > > > >     platforms.  When talking about a cache we three fundamental operations:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >         1) write back - this writes the content of the cache back to the
> > > > > > >            backing memory
> > > > > > >         2) invalidate - this remove the content of the cache
> > > > > > >         3) write back + invalidate - do both of the above
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Agreed that drm_cflush_* isn't a great API.  In this particular case
> > > > > > (IIUC), I need wb+inv so that there aren't dirty cache lines that drop
> > > > > > out to memory later, and so that I don't get a cache hit on
> > > > > > uncached/wc mmap'ing.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there a cacheable alias lying around (e.g. the linear map), or are
> > > > > these addresses only mapped uncached/wc?
> > > > >
> > > > > If there's a cacheable alias, performing an invalidate isn't sufficient,
> > > > > since a CPU can allocate a new (clean) entry at any point in time (e.g.
> > > > > as a result of prefetching or arbitrary speculation).
> > > >
> > > > I *believe* that there are not alias mappings (that I don't control
> > > > myself) for pages coming from
> > > > shmem_file_setup()/shmem_read_mapping_page()..
> > >
> > > AFAICT, that's regular anonymous memory, so there will be a cacheable
> > > alias in the linear/direct map.
> >
> > tbh, I'm not 100% sure whether there is a cacheable alias, or whether
> > any potential linear map is torn down.
>
> I'm fairly confident that the linear/direct map cacheable alias is not
> torn down when pages are allocated. The gneeric page allocation code
> doesn't do so, and I see nothing the shmem code to do so.
>
> For arm64, we can tear down portions of the linear map, but that has to
> be done explicitly, and this is only possible when using rodata_full. If
> not using rodata_full, it is not possible to dynamically tear down the
> cacheable alias.

So, we do end up using GFP_HIGHUSER, which appears to get passed thru
when shmem gets to the point of actually allocating pages.. not sure
if that just ends up being a hint, or if it guarantees that we don't
get something in the linear map.

(Bear with me while I "page" this all back in.. last time I dug thru
the shmem code was probably pre-armv8, or at least before I had any
armv8 hw)

BR,
-R