| Message ID | 20230226110802.103134-8-usama.arif@bytedance.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Parallel CPU bringup for x86_64 | expand |
On Sun, Feb 26 2023 at 11:07, Usama Arif wrote: > @@ -265,7 +265,12 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_verify, SYM_L_GLOBAL) > * addresses where we're currently running on. We have to do that here > * because in 32bit we couldn't load a 64bit linear address. > */ > - lgdt early_gdt_descr(%rip) > + subq $16, %rsp > + movw $(GDT_SIZE-1), (%rsp) > + leaq gdt_page(%rdx), %rax Even on !SMP gdt_page is in the 0...__per_cpu_end range. Which means that on !SMP this results in: leaq 0xb000(%rdx),%rax and RDX is 0. That's not really a valid GDT pointer, right? > + movq %rax, 2(%rsp) > + lgdt (%rsp) and obviously that's equally broken for the task stack part: > movq pcpu_hot + X86_current_task(%rdx), %rax This needs: --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_ /* Get the per cpu offset for the given CPU# which is in ECX */ movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rcx,8), %rdx #else - xorl %edx, %edx + leaq INIT_PER_CPU_VAR(fixed_percpu_data)(%rip), %rdx #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ /* in the initial_stack patch, which then allows to remove this hunk in the initial_gs patch: @@ -286,9 +286,6 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_ * the per cpu areas are set up. */ movl $MSR_GS_BASE,%ecx -#ifndef CONFIG_SMP - leaq INIT_PER_CPU_VAR(fixed_percpu_data)(%rip), %rdx -#endif movl %edx, %eax shrq $32, %rdx wrmsr Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) Thanks, tglx
> > Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) > > Thanks, for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose
On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 22:01 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > This needs: > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_ > /* Get the per cpu offset for the given CPU# which is in ECX */ > movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rcx,8), %rdx > #else > - xorl %edx, %edx > + leaq INIT_PER_CPU_VAR(fixed_percpu_data)(%rip), %rdx > #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ > > /* > So yeah, I'd frowned at the zero %edx there for a while (but evidently not long enough to realise that even if it's right it should be %rdx). But then figured it was an *offset*, that __per_cpu_offset[0] would be zero too at least on first boot and probably forever, did a quick grep for pcpu_hot and figured my brain hurt and Brian probably knew what he was doing. Empirically, yours doesn't boot and Brian's does. If I just fix it to zero all of %rdx and then run (just up to the initial_gs patch) with qemu -d in_asm ... grep gdt_page System.map ffffffff05d7a000 A init_per_cpu__gdt_page ffffffff825cfeb0 r __ksymtab_gdt_page ffffffff82811000 D gdt_page 0x060000a9: 48 c7 c0 b2 00 00 a2 movq $-0x5dffff4e, %rax 0x060000b0: ff e0 jmpq *%rax ---------------- IN: 0xffffffffa20000b2: 48 31 d2 xorq %rdx, %rdx 0xffffffffa20000b5: 48 8b 82 c0 74 d5 a3 movq -0x5c2a8b40(%rdx), %rax 0xffffffffa20000bc: 48 8b a0 58 14 00 00 movq 0x1458(%rax), %rsp 0xffffffffa20000c3: 48 83 ec 10 subq $0x10, %rsp 0xffffffffa20000c7: 66 c7 04 24 7f 00 movw $0x7f, (%rsp) 0xffffffffa20000cd: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 a3 leaq -0x5c7ef000(%rdx), %rax 0xffffffffa20000d4: 48 89 44 24 02 movq %rax, 2(%rsp) 0xffffffffa20000d9: 0f 01 14 24 lgdtq (%rsp) 0xffffffffa20000dd: 48 83 c4 10 addq $0x10, %rsp 0xffffffffa20000e1: 31 c0 xorl %eax, %eax 0xffffffffa20000e3: 8e d8 movl %eax, %ds I cannot work out where the value -0x5c7ef000 comes from, but it doesn't seem to be the 0xb000 you claimed, and my brain is hurting again...
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 4:01 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 26 2023 at 11:07, Usama Arif wrote: > > @@ -265,7 +265,12 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_verify, SYM_L_GLOBAL) > > * addresses where we're currently running on. We have to do that here > > * because in 32bit we couldn't load a 64bit linear address. > > */ > > - lgdt early_gdt_descr(%rip) > > + subq $16, %rsp > > + movw $(GDT_SIZE-1), (%rsp) > > + leaq gdt_page(%rdx), %rax > > Even on !SMP gdt_page is in the 0...__per_cpu_end range. Which means > that on !SMP this results in: > > leaq 0xb000(%rdx),%rax > > and RDX is 0. That's not really a valid GDT pointer, right? No. On !SMP per-cpu variables are normal variables in the .data section. They are not gathered together in the per-cpu section and are not accessed with the GS prefix. ffffffff810000c9: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 82 lea 0x82811000(%rdx),%rax ffffffff810000cc: R_X86_64_32S gdt_page ffffffff82811000 D gdt_page So RDX=0 is correct. > > + movq %rax, 2(%rsp) > > + lgdt (%rsp) > > and obviously that's equally broken for the task stack part: > > > movq pcpu_hot + X86_current_task(%rdx), %rax Same as gdt_page: ffffffff810000b1: 48 8b 82 00 88 a8 82 mov 0x82a88800(%rdx),%rax ffffffff810000b4: R_X86_64_32S pcpu_hot ffffffff82a88800 D pcpu_hot > This needs: > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S > @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_ > /* Get the per cpu offset for the given CPU# which is in ECX */ > movq __per_cpu_offset(,%rcx,8), %rdx > #else > - xorl %edx, %edx > + leaq INIT_PER_CPU_VAR(fixed_percpu_data)(%rip), %rdx > #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */ > > /* > > in the initial_stack patch, which then allows to remove this hunk in the > initial_gs patch: > > @@ -286,9 +286,6 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_ > * the per cpu areas are set up. > */ > movl $MSR_GS_BASE,%ecx > -#ifndef CONFIG_SMP > - leaq INIT_PER_CPU_VAR(fixed_percpu_data)(%rip), %rdx > -#endif On !SMP the only thing GSBASE is used for is the stack protector canary, which is in fixed_percpu_data. There is no per-cpu section. FWIW, I posted a patch set a while back that switched x86-64 to use the options added to newer compilers controlling where the canary is located, allowing it to become a standard per-cpu variable and removing the need to force the per-cpu section to be zero-based. However it was not accepted at that time, due to removing support for stack protector on older compilers (GCC < 8.1). > movl %edx, %eax > shrq $32, %rdx > wrmsr > > Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) Makes sense, only the earliest generations of x86-64 processors have a single core/thread, and an SMP kernel can still run on them. -- Brian Gerst
On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 21:57 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > ---------------- > IN: > 0xffffffffa20000b2: 48 31 d2 xorq %rdx, %rdx > 0xffffffffa20000b5: 48 8b 82 c0 74 d5 a3 movq -0x5c2a8b40(%rdx), %rax > 0xffffffffa20000bc: 48 8b a0 58 14 00 00 movq 0x1458(%rax), %rsp > 0xffffffffa20000c3: 48 83 ec 10 subq $0x10, %rsp > 0xffffffffa20000c7: 66 c7 04 24 7f 00 movw $0x7f, (%rsp) > 0xffffffffa20000cd: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 a3 leaq -0x5c7ef000(%rdx), %rax > 0xffffffffa20000d4: 48 89 44 24 02 movq %rax, 2(%rsp) > 0xffffffffa20000d9: 0f 01 14 24 lgdtq (%rsp) > 0xffffffffa20000dd: 48 83 c4 10 addq $0x10, %rsp > 0xffffffffa20000e1: 31 c0 xorl %eax, %eax > 0xffffffffa20000e3: 8e d8 movl %eax, %ds > > I cannot work out where the value -0x5c7ef000 comes from, but it > doesn't seem to be the 0xb000 you claimed, and my brain is hurting > again... Turning off CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE (or just looking at the vmlinux disassembly instead as Brian did) helps to resolve that FWIW. I've changed it to zero all of %rdx and pushed it back to the v12bis branch.
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 5:41 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: > > On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 21:57 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > > ---------------- > > IN: > > 0xffffffffa20000b2: 48 31 d2 xorq %rdx, %rdx > > 0xffffffffa20000b5: 48 8b 82 c0 74 d5 a3 movq -0x5c2a8b40(%rdx), %rax > > 0xffffffffa20000bc: 48 8b a0 58 14 00 00 movq 0x1458(%rax), %rsp > > 0xffffffffa20000c3: 48 83 ec 10 subq $0x10, %rsp > > 0xffffffffa20000c7: 66 c7 04 24 7f 00 movw $0x7f, (%rsp) > > 0xffffffffa20000cd: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 a3 leaq -0x5c7ef000(%rdx), %rax > > 0xffffffffa20000d4: 48 89 44 24 02 movq %rax, 2(%rsp) > > 0xffffffffa20000d9: 0f 01 14 24 lgdtq (%rsp) > > 0xffffffffa20000dd: 48 83 c4 10 addq $0x10, %rsp > > 0xffffffffa20000e1: 31 c0 xorl %eax, %eax > > 0xffffffffa20000e3: 8e d8 movl %eax, %ds > > > > I cannot work out where the value -0x5c7ef000 comes from, but it > > doesn't seem to be the 0xb000 you claimed, and my brain is hurting > > again... > > Turning off CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE (or just looking at the vmlinux > disassembly instead as Brian did) helps to resolve that FWIW. > > I've changed it to zero all of %rdx and pushed it back to the v12bis > branch. xorl %edx, %edx is preferred, as a 32-bit operation zero-extends to the full 64-bit register. Using xorq to clear any of the lower 8 registers adds an unnecessary REX prefix. Just one of many quirks of the x86 instruction set... -- Brian Gerst
On 28 February 2023 22:48:42 GMT, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote: >On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 5:41 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 21:57 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: >> > >> > ---------------- >> > IN: >> > 0xffffffffa20000b2: 48 31 d2 xorq %rdx, %rdx >> > 0xffffffffa20000b5: 48 8b 82 c0 74 d5 a3 movq -0x5c2a8b40(%rdx), %rax >> > 0xffffffffa20000bc: 48 8b a0 58 14 00 00 movq 0x1458(%rax), %rsp >> > 0xffffffffa20000c3: 48 83 ec 10 subq $0x10, %rsp >> > 0xffffffffa20000c7: 66 c7 04 24 7f 00 movw $0x7f, (%rsp) >> > 0xffffffffa20000cd: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 a3 leaq -0x5c7ef000(%rdx), %rax >> > 0xffffffffa20000d4: 48 89 44 24 02 movq %rax, 2(%rsp) >> > 0xffffffffa20000d9: 0f 01 14 24 lgdtq (%rsp) >> > 0xffffffffa20000dd: 48 83 c4 10 addq $0x10, %rsp >> > 0xffffffffa20000e1: 31 c0 xorl %eax, %eax >> > 0xffffffffa20000e3: 8e d8 movl %eax, %ds >> > >> > I cannot work out where the value -0x5c7ef000 comes from, but it >> > doesn't seem to be the 0xb000 you claimed, and my brain is hurting >> > again... >> >> Turning off CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE (or just looking at the vmlinux >> disassembly instead as Brian did) helps to resolve that FWIW. >> >> I've changed it to zero all of %rdx and pushed it back to the v12bis >> branch. > >xorl %edx, %edx is preferred, as a 32-bit operation zero-extends to >the full 64-bit register. Using xorq to clear any of the lower 8 >registers adds an unnecessary REX prefix. Just one of many quirks of >the x86 instruction set... Ewww. Couldn't the assembler choose to omit the REX prefix then? It does more tricksy things than that already. I almost prefer having the prefix but (in the morning) if you prefer I can put it back as it was with a comment about the zero-extension.
On February 28, 2023 3:42:55 PM PST, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: > > >On 28 February 2023 22:48:42 GMT, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote: >>On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 5:41 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 21:57 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: >>> > >>> > ---------------- >>> > IN: >>> > 0xffffffffa20000b2: 48 31 d2 xorq %rdx, %rdx >>> > 0xffffffffa20000b5: 48 8b 82 c0 74 d5 a3 movq -0x5c2a8b40(%rdx), %rax >>> > 0xffffffffa20000bc: 48 8b a0 58 14 00 00 movq 0x1458(%rax), %rsp >>> > 0xffffffffa20000c3: 48 83 ec 10 subq $0x10, %rsp >>> > 0xffffffffa20000c7: 66 c7 04 24 7f 00 movw $0x7f, (%rsp) >>> > 0xffffffffa20000cd: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 a3 leaq -0x5c7ef000(%rdx), %rax >>> > 0xffffffffa20000d4: 48 89 44 24 02 movq %rax, 2(%rsp) >>> > 0xffffffffa20000d9: 0f 01 14 24 lgdtq (%rsp) >>> > 0xffffffffa20000dd: 48 83 c4 10 addq $0x10, %rsp >>> > 0xffffffffa20000e1: 31 c0 xorl %eax, %eax >>> > 0xffffffffa20000e3: 8e d8 movl %eax, %ds >>> > >>> > I cannot work out where the value -0x5c7ef000 comes from, but it >>> > doesn't seem to be the 0xb000 you claimed, and my brain is hurting >>> > again... >>> >>> Turning off CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE (or just looking at the vmlinux >>> disassembly instead as Brian did) helps to resolve that FWIW. >>> >>> I've changed it to zero all of %rdx and pushed it back to the v12bis >>> branch. >> >>xorl %edx, %edx is preferred, as a 32-bit operation zero-extends to >>the full 64-bit register. Using xorq to clear any of the lower 8 >>registers adds an unnecessary REX prefix. Just one of many quirks of >>the x86 instruction set... > >Ewww. Couldn't the assembler choose to omit the REX prefix then? It does more tricksy things than that already. > >I almost prefer having the prefix but (in the morning) if you prefer I can put it back as it was with a comment about the zero-extension. > Like it or not, that's how the assembler currently works.
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 6:43 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > On 28 February 2023 22:48:42 GMT, Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com> wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 5:41 PM David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 21:57 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > >> > > >> > ---------------- > >> > IN: > >> > 0xffffffffa20000b2: 48 31 d2 xorq %rdx, %rdx > >> > 0xffffffffa20000b5: 48 8b 82 c0 74 d5 a3 movq -0x5c2a8b40(%rdx), %rax > >> > 0xffffffffa20000bc: 48 8b a0 58 14 00 00 movq 0x1458(%rax), %rsp > >> > 0xffffffffa20000c3: 48 83 ec 10 subq $0x10, %rsp > >> > 0xffffffffa20000c7: 66 c7 04 24 7f 00 movw $0x7f, (%rsp) > >> > 0xffffffffa20000cd: 48 8d 82 00 10 81 a3 leaq -0x5c7ef000(%rdx), %rax > >> > 0xffffffffa20000d4: 48 89 44 24 02 movq %rax, 2(%rsp) > >> > 0xffffffffa20000d9: 0f 01 14 24 lgdtq (%rsp) > >> > 0xffffffffa20000dd: 48 83 c4 10 addq $0x10, %rsp > >> > 0xffffffffa20000e1: 31 c0 xorl %eax, %eax > >> > 0xffffffffa20000e3: 8e d8 movl %eax, %ds > >> > > >> > I cannot work out where the value -0x5c7ef000 comes from, but it > >> > doesn't seem to be the 0xb000 you claimed, and my brain is hurting > >> > again... > >> > >> Turning off CONFIG_RANDOMIZE_BASE (or just looking at the vmlinux > >> disassembly instead as Brian did) helps to resolve that FWIW. > >> > >> I've changed it to zero all of %rdx and pushed it back to the v12bis > >> branch. > > > >xorl %edx, %edx is preferred, as a 32-bit operation zero-extends to > >the full 64-bit register. Using xorq to clear any of the lower 8 > >registers adds an unnecessary REX prefix. Just one of many quirks of > >the x86 instruction set... > > Ewww. Couldn't the assembler choose to omit the REX prefix then? It does more tricksy things than that already. > > I almost prefer having the prefix but (in the morning) if you prefer I can put it back as it was with a comment about the zero-extension. commit a7bea8308933aaeea76dad7d42a6e51000417626 Author: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> Date: Mon Jul 2 04:31:54 2018 -0600 x86/asm/64: Use 32-bit XOR to zero registers Some Intel CPUs don't recognize 64-bit XORs as zeroing idioms. Zeroing idioms don't require execution bandwidth, as they're being taken care of in the frontend (through register renaming). Use 32-bit XORs instead. Not that speed is important here, but it's good to be consistent across the whole kernel. Someone will eventually come by and fix it up anyways, as there have been a few of these patches already in the git history. -- Brian Gerst
On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 16:02 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > Ewww. Couldn't the assembler choose to omit the REX prefix then? It > > does more tricksy things than that already. > > > > I almost prefer having the prefix but (in the morning) if you > > prefer I can put it back as it was with a comment about the zero- > > extension. > > > > Like it or not, that's how the assembler currently works. Last time someone told me "you can't tell the assembler what you actually mean; you have to tell it something different" I threw my toys out of the pram a little bit and implemented all of the 16-bit '-m16' support in LLVM/clang. On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 19:03 -0500, Brian Gerst wrote: > > commit a7bea8308933aaeea76dad7d42a6e51000417626 > Author: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> > Date: Mon Jul 2 04:31:54 2018 -0600 > > x86/asm/64: Use 32-bit XOR to zero registers > > Some Intel CPUs don't recognize 64-bit XORs as zeroing idioms. Zeroing > idioms don't require execution bandwidth, as they're being taken care > of in the frontend (through register renaming). Use 32-bit XORs instead. > > Not that speed is important here, but it's good to be consistent > across the whole kernel. Someone will eventually come by and fix it > up anyways, as there have been a few of these patches already in the > git history. So there literally is a better encoding of this mnemonic which isn't just a byte shorter, but is also faster to execute. And one *hopes* that the compiler knows about it... yep... so why in $DEITY's name can't I type what I mean into an asm file? Isn't asm intricate enough already? Meh, life's too short. Not shaving that particular yak today. I've put the git tree back to using %edx, with a comment that it zero-extends.
On Tue, Feb 28 2023 at 21:57, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Tue, 2023-02-28 at 22:01 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Empirically, yours doesn't boot and Brian's does. Correct. It was just my sleep deprived brain which got lost in assembly and #ifdef maze. On UP per_cpu variables just become regular variables and gdt_page(%rdx) with %rdx = 0 will just resolve that address. Sorry for the noise. Thanks, tglx
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:33PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) > > > > Thanks, > > for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . > maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose As one of the folks keeping an eye on tinyconfig and kernel size, I actually think we *should* make this change and rip out !CONFIG_SMP, albeit carefully. In particular, I would propose that we rip out !CONFIG_SMP, *but* we allow building with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1. (And we could make sure in that case that the compiler can recognize that at compile time and optimize accordingly, so that it might provide some of the UP optimizations for us.) Then, any *optimizations* for the "will only have one CPU, ever" case can move to CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 rather than !CONFIG_SMP. I think many of those optimizations may be worth keeping for small embedded systems, or for cases like Linux-as-bootloader or similar. The difference here would be that code written for !CONFIG_SMP today needs to account for the UP case for *correctness*, whereas code written for CONFIG_SMP can *optionally* consider CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 for *performance*.
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 12:32:26PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:33PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . > > maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose > > As one of the folks keeping an eye on tinyconfig and kernel size, I > actually think we *should* make this change and rip out !CONFIG_SMP, > albeit carefully. > > In particular, I would propose that we rip out !CONFIG_SMP, *but* we > allow building with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1. (And we could make sure in that > case that the compiler can recognize that at compile time and optimize > accordingly, so that it might provide some of the UP optimizations for > us.) > > Then, any *optimizations* for the "will only have one CPU, ever" case > can move to CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 rather than !CONFIG_SMP. I think many of > those optimizations may be worth keeping for small embedded systems, or > for cases like Linux-as-bootloader or similar. > > The difference here would be that code written for !CONFIG_SMP today > needs to account for the UP case for *correctness*, whereas code written > for CONFIG_SMP can *optionally* consider CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 for > *performance*. It certainly would not make much sense to keep Tiny RCU and Tiny SRCU around if there was no CONFIG_SMP=n. It should be interesting seeing what comes up out of the IoT space. ;-) Thanx, Paul
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:16:32PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 12:32:26PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:33PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > > > Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . > > > maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose > > > > As one of the folks keeping an eye on tinyconfig and kernel size, I > > actually think we *should* make this change and rip out !CONFIG_SMP, > > albeit carefully. > > > > In particular, I would propose that we rip out !CONFIG_SMP, *but* we > > allow building with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1. (And we could make sure in that > > case that the compiler can recognize that at compile time and optimize > > accordingly, so that it might provide some of the UP optimizations for > > us.) > > > > Then, any *optimizations* for the "will only have one CPU, ever" case > > can move to CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 rather than !CONFIG_SMP. I think many of > > those optimizations may be worth keeping for small embedded systems, or > > for cases like Linux-as-bootloader or similar. > > > > The difference here would be that code written for !CONFIG_SMP today > > needs to account for the UP case for *correctness*, whereas code written > > for CONFIG_SMP can *optionally* consider CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 for > > *performance*. > > It certainly would not make much sense to keep Tiny RCU and Tiny SRCU > around if there was no CONFIG_SMP=n. On the contrary, I think it's entirely appropriate to keep them for CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1; that's exactly the kind of simple optimization that seems well worth having. (Ideal optimization: "very very simple for UP, complex for SMP"; non-ideal optimization: "complex for SMP, differently complex for UP".) - Josh
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:25:36PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:16:32PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 12:32:26PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:33PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . > > > > maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose > > > > > > As one of the folks keeping an eye on tinyconfig and kernel size, I > > > actually think we *should* make this change and rip out !CONFIG_SMP, > > > albeit carefully. > > > > > > In particular, I would propose that we rip out !CONFIG_SMP, *but* we > > > allow building with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1. (And we could make sure in that > > > case that the compiler can recognize that at compile time and optimize > > > accordingly, so that it might provide some of the UP optimizations for > > > us.) > > > > > > Then, any *optimizations* for the "will only have one CPU, ever" case > > > can move to CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 rather than !CONFIG_SMP. I think many of > > > those optimizations may be worth keeping for small embedded systems, or > > > for cases like Linux-as-bootloader or similar. > > > > > > The difference here would be that code written for !CONFIG_SMP today > > > needs to account for the UP case for *correctness*, whereas code written > > > for CONFIG_SMP can *optionally* consider CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 for > > > *performance*. > > > > It certainly would not make much sense to keep Tiny RCU and Tiny SRCU > > around if there was no CONFIG_SMP=n. > > On the contrary, I think it's entirely appropriate to keep them for > CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1; that's exactly the kind of simple optimization that > seems well worth having. (Ideal optimization: "very very simple for UP, > complex for SMP"; non-ideal optimization: "complex for SMP, differently > complex for UP".) Fair enough, but how does removing CONFIG_SMP help with that? Given that it is not all that hard to work around the lack of CONFIG_SMP for Tiny RCU and Tiny SRCU, then it cannot be all that hard to work around that lack for the use cases that you are trying to get rid of, right? Thanx, Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------ diff --git a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig index 9071182b1284b..7487bee3d4341 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig +++ b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ menu "RCU Subsystem" config TREE_RCU bool - default y if SMP + default y if CONFIG_NR_CPUS = 1 # Dynticks-idle tracking select CONTEXT_TRACKING_IDLE help @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ config PREEMPT_RCU config TINY_RCU bool - default y if !PREEMPTION && !SMP + default y if !PREEMPTION && CONFIG_NR_CPUS != 1 help This option selects the RCU implementation that is designed for UP systems from which real-time response
On 3/1/23 16:28, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:25:36PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:16:32PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 12:32:26PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: >>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:33PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>>> Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . >>>>> maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose >>>> >>>> As one of the folks keeping an eye on tinyconfig and kernel size, I >>>> actually think we *should* make this change and rip out !CONFIG_SMP, >>>> albeit carefully. >>>> >>>> In particular, I would propose that we rip out !CONFIG_SMP, *but* we >>>> allow building with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1. (And we could make sure in that >>>> case that the compiler can recognize that at compile time and optimize >>>> accordingly, so that it might provide some of the UP optimizations for >>>> us.) >>>> >>>> Then, any *optimizations* for the "will only have one CPU, ever" case >>>> can move to CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 rather than !CONFIG_SMP. I think many of >>>> those optimizations may be worth keeping for small embedded systems, or >>>> for cases like Linux-as-bootloader or similar. >>>> >>>> The difference here would be that code written for !CONFIG_SMP today >>>> needs to account for the UP case for *correctness*, whereas code written >>>> for CONFIG_SMP can *optionally* consider CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 for >>>> *performance*. >>> >>> It certainly would not make much sense to keep Tiny RCU and Tiny SRCU >>> around if there was no CONFIG_SMP=n. >> >> On the contrary, I think it's entirely appropriate to keep them for >> CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1; that's exactly the kind of simple optimization that >> seems well worth having. (Ideal optimization: "very very simple for UP, >> complex for SMP"; non-ideal optimization: "complex for SMP, differently >> complex for UP".) > > Fair enough, but how does removing CONFIG_SMP help with that? Given that > it is not all that hard to work around the lack of CONFIG_SMP for Tiny > RCU and Tiny SRCU, then it cannot be all that hard to work around that > lack for the use cases that you are trying to get rid of, right? > > Thanx, Paul > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig > index 9071182b1284b..7487bee3d4341 100644 > --- a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig > +++ b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig > @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ menu "RCU Subsystem" > > config TREE_RCU > bool > - default y if SMP > + default y if CONFIG_NR_CPUS = 1 > # Dynticks-idle tracking > select CONTEXT_TRACKING_IDLE > help > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ config PREEMPT_RCU > > config TINY_RCU > bool > - default y if !PREEMPTION && !SMP > + default y if !PREEMPTION && CONFIG_NR_CPUS != 1 > help > This option selects the RCU implementation that is > designed for UP systems from which real-time response but drop the CONFIG_ prefixes...
On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 05:05:39PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > On 3/1/23 16:28, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:25:36PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 02:16:32PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > >>> On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 12:32:26PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > >>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:02:33PM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > >>>> Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Maybe we should enforce CONFIG_SMP=y first :) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> > >>>>> for 64 bit I can see the point of removing the !SMP case entirely from arch/x86 . > >>>>> maybe even for 32 bit if it just makes the code simpler I suppose > >>>> > >>>> As one of the folks keeping an eye on tinyconfig and kernel size, I > >>>> actually think we *should* make this change and rip out !CONFIG_SMP, > >>>> albeit carefully. > >>>> > >>>> In particular, I would propose that we rip out !CONFIG_SMP, *but* we > >>>> allow building with CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1. (And we could make sure in that > >>>> case that the compiler can recognize that at compile time and optimize > >>>> accordingly, so that it might provide some of the UP optimizations for > >>>> us.) > >>>> > >>>> Then, any *optimizations* for the "will only have one CPU, ever" case > >>>> can move to CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 rather than !CONFIG_SMP. I think many of > >>>> those optimizations may be worth keeping for small embedded systems, or > >>>> for cases like Linux-as-bootloader or similar. > >>>> > >>>> The difference here would be that code written for !CONFIG_SMP today > >>>> needs to account for the UP case for *correctness*, whereas code written > >>>> for CONFIG_SMP can *optionally* consider CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1 for > >>>> *performance*. > >>> > >>> It certainly would not make much sense to keep Tiny RCU and Tiny SRCU > >>> around if there was no CONFIG_SMP=n. > >> > >> On the contrary, I think it's entirely appropriate to keep them for > >> CONFIG_NR_CPUS=1; that's exactly the kind of simple optimization that > >> seems well worth having. (Ideal optimization: "very very simple for UP, > >> complex for SMP"; non-ideal optimization: "complex for SMP, differently > >> complex for UP".) > > > > Fair enough, but how does removing CONFIG_SMP help with that? Given that > > it is not all that hard to work around the lack of CONFIG_SMP for Tiny > > RCU and Tiny SRCU, then it cannot be all that hard to work around that > > lack for the use cases that you are trying to get rid of, right? > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > diff --git a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig > > index 9071182b1284b..7487bee3d4341 100644 > > --- a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig > > +++ b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig > > @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ menu "RCU Subsystem" > > > > config TREE_RCU > > bool > > - default y if SMP > > + default y if CONFIG_NR_CPUS = 1 > > # Dynticks-idle tracking > > select CONTEXT_TRACKING_IDLE > > help > > @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ config PREEMPT_RCU > > > > config TINY_RCU > > bool > > - default y if !PREEMPTION && !SMP > > + default y if !PREEMPTION && CONFIG_NR_CPUS != 1 > > help > > This option selects the RCU implementation that is > > designed for UP systems from which real-time response > > but drop the CONFIG_ prefixes... Indeed. What I don't understand is how the above passed some light rcutorture testing. And the comparisons are backwards as well. Perhaps this time two bugs make working code? How about the following? Thanx, Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------ diff --git a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig index 9071182b1284b..a2ba97b949498 100644 --- a/kernel/rcu/Kconfig +++ b/kernel/rcu/Kconfig @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ menu "RCU Subsystem" config TREE_RCU bool - default y if SMP + default y if NR_CPUS != 1 # Dynticks-idle tracking select CONTEXT_TRACKING_IDLE help @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ config PREEMPT_RCU config TINY_RCU bool - default y if !PREEMPTION && !SMP + default y if !PREEMPTION && NR_CPUS = 1 help This option selects the RCU implementation that is designed for UP systems from which real-time response
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c index ab6e29b32c04..236f2423454d 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/sleep.c @@ -112,8 +112,6 @@ int x86_acpi_suspend_lowlevel(void) #else /* CONFIG_64BIT */ #ifdef CONFIG_SMP current->thread.sp = (unsigned long)temp_stack + sizeof(temp_stack); - early_gdt_descr.address = - (unsigned long)get_cpu_gdt_rw(smp_processor_id()); initial_gs = per_cpu_offset(smp_processor_id()); smpboot_control = smp_processor_id(); #endif diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S index 5a2417d788d1..0ccca297e90e 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S @@ -265,7 +265,12 @@ SYM_INNER_LABEL(secondary_startup_64_no_verify, SYM_L_GLOBAL) * addresses where we're currently running on. We have to do that here * because in 32bit we couldn't load a 64bit linear address. */ - lgdt early_gdt_descr(%rip) + subq $16, %rsp + movw $(GDT_SIZE-1), (%rsp) + leaq gdt_page(%rdx), %rax + movq %rax, 2(%rsp) + lgdt (%rsp) + addq $16, %rsp /* set up data segments */ xorl %eax,%eax @@ -667,10 +672,6 @@ SYM_DATA_END(level1_fixmap_pgt) .data .align 16 -SYM_DATA(early_gdt_descr, .word GDT_ENTRIES*8-1) -SYM_DATA_LOCAL(early_gdt_descr_base, .quad INIT_PER_CPU_VAR(gdt_page)) - - .align 16 SYM_DATA(smpboot_control, .long 0) .align 16 diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c index 62e3bf37f0b8..a22460a07cf8 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c @@ -1110,10 +1110,10 @@ static int do_boot_cpu(int apicid, int cpu, struct task_struct *idle, start_ip = real_mode_header->trampoline_start64; #endif idle->thread.sp = (unsigned long)task_pt_regs(idle); - early_gdt_descr.address = (unsigned long)get_cpu_gdt_rw(cpu); initial_code = (unsigned long)start_secondary; if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_32)) { + early_gdt_descr.address = (unsigned long)get_cpu_gdt_rw(cpu); initial_stack = idle->thread.sp; } else { smpboot_control = cpu;