[PATCH v2 1/4] arm64: Add BBM Level 2 cpu feature
Yang Shi
yang at os.amperecomputing.com
Mon Mar 3 11:55:28 PST 2025
On 3/3/25 1:40 AM, Mikołaj Lenczewski wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 06:45:38PM -0800, Yang Shi wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/28/25 5:29 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>>>> index 940343beb3d4..baae6d458996 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>>>> @@ -2057,6 +2057,17 @@ config ARM64_TLB_RANGE
>>>> The feature introduces new assembly instructions, and they were
>>>> support when binutils >= 2.30.
>>>> +config ARM64_ENABLE_BBML2_NOABORT
>>>> + bool "Enable support for Break-Before-Make Level 2 detection
>>>> and usage"
>>>> + default y
>>>> + help
>>>> + FEAT_BBM provides detection of support levels for
>>>> break-before-make
>>>> + sequences. If BBM level 2 is supported, some TLB maintenance
>>>> requirements
>>>> + can be relaxed to improve performance. We additonally require the
>>>> + property that the implementation cannot ever raise TLB
>>>> Conflict Aborts.
>>>> + Selecting N causes the kernel to fallback to BBM level 0
>>>> behaviour
>>>> + even if the system supports BBM level 2.
>>>> +
>>>> endmenu # "ARMv8.4 architectural features"
>>>> menu "ARMv8.5 architectural features"
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>>>> index 0b5ca6e0eb09..2d6db33d4e45 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h
>>>> @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ cpucap_is_possible(const unsigned int cap)
>>>> return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_PAN);
>>>> case ARM64_HAS_EPAN:
>>>> return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_EPAN);
>>>> + case ARM64_HAS_BBML2_NOABORT:
>>>> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_BBML2_NOABORT);
>>>> case ARM64_SVE:
>>>> return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_SVE);
>>>> case ARM64_SME:
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>>>> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>>>> index e0e4478f5fb5..108ef3fbbc00 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>>>> @@ -866,6 +866,11 @@ static __always_inline bool
>>>> system_supports_mpam_hcr(void)
>>>> return alternative_has_cap_unlikely(ARM64_MPAM_HCR);
>>>> }
>>>> +static inline bool system_supports_bbml2_noabort(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + return alternative_has_cap_unlikely(ARM64_HAS_BBML2_NOABORT);
>>>> +}
>>> Hi Miko,
>>>
>>> I added AmpereOne mdir on top of this patch. I can see BBML2 feature is
>>> detected via dmesg. But system_supports_bbml2_noabort() returns false.
>>> The warning in the below debug patch is triggered:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> index faa9094d97dd..a70829ae2bd0 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
>>> @@ -3814,6 +3814,9 @@ void __init setup_system_features(void)
>>> {
>>> setup_system_capabilities();
>>>
>>> + if (!system_supports_bbml2_noabort())
>>> + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
>>> +
>>> kpti_install_ng_mappings();
>>>
>>> sve_setup();
>>>
>>> I thought it may be too early. But it seems other system features work
>>> well, for example, MPAM. I didn't figure out why. It is weird.
>> I just figured out the problem It is because the wrong kconfig name is used
>> in cpucaps.h. The code is:
>>
>> + case ARM64_HAS_BBML2_NOABORT:
>> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_BBML2_NOABORT);
>>
>> But the kconfig name actually is:
>>
>> +config ARM64_ENABLE_BBML2_NOABORT
>>
>> IMHO, the "ENABLE" in kconfig name sounds unnecessary.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Yang
>>
>>
> Hi Yang,
>
> Thank you for the review, and apologies for the slight delay.
>
> Thanks again for the spot, I agree that `ENABLE` is probably redundant
> (and clearly, caused an issue here). Will remove this. Please let me
> know if there are any other issues with rebasing your patches on top of
> mine.
Thank you. I didn't spot any other problem on our machines. With this
addressed, you can have Tested-by: Yang Shi <yang at amperecomputing.com>,
although I can't test on asymmetric system.
Yang
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list