Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 4 Nov 2022 17:01:29 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        willy@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        aarcange@redhat.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
        jroedel@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/13] x86_64: Remove pointless set_64bit() usage
Message-ID: <Y2U3WdU61FvYlpUh@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20221022111403.531902164@infradead.org>
 <20221022114425.168036718@infradead.org>
 <Y2QR/BRHjjYUNszh@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
 <CAFULd4bkn3i0ds1ywhxAZBQH+1O-zbPWscUqjoEcv4xvnxOnSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y2QYHZsZNs33NXZB@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>
 <CAHk-=wjCBOwSWec+=h08q3Gbr4UjSfX46GrQjzHZLFokziS7nA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=wjCBOwSWec+=h08q3Gbr4UjSfX46GrQjzHZLFokziS7nA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 01:39:17PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> And even after I checked *that*, I then checked the 'struct irte' to
> check that it's actually properly defined, and it isn't. Considering
> that this all requires 16-byte alignment to work, I think that type
> should also be marked as being 16-byte aligned.
> 
> In fact, I wonder if we should aim to actually force compile-time
> checking, because right now we have
> 
>         VM_BUG_ON((unsigned long)(p1) % (2 * sizeof(long)));
>         VM_BUG_ON((unsigned long)((p1) + 1) != (unsigned long)(p2));
> 
> in our x86-64 __cmpxchg_double() macro, and honestly, that first one
> might be better as a compile time check of __alignof__, and the second
> one shouldn't exisrt at all because our interface shouldn't be using
> two different pointers when the only possible use is for one single
> aligned value.

So cmpxchg_double() does a cmpxchg on a double long value and is
currently supported by: i386, x86_64, arm64 and s390.

On all those, except i386, two longs are u128.

So how about we introduce u128 and cmpxchg128 -- then it directly
mirrors the u64 and cmpxchg64 usage we already have. It then also
naturally imposses the alignment thing.

Afaict the only cmpxchg_double() users are:

  arch/s390/kernel/perf_cpum_sf.c
  drivers/iommu/amd/iommu.c
  drivers/iommu/intel/irq_remapping.c
  mm/slub.c

Of those slub.c is the only one that cares about 32bit and would need
some 'compat' code to pick between cmpxchg64 / cmpxchg128, but it
already has everything wrapped in helpers so that shouldn't be too big
of a worry.

Then we can convert these few users over and simply delete the whole
cmpxchg_double() thing.