[PATCH] arm64: remove HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL

[Shakeel Butt]

On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 02:20:54PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 02:07:57PM -0800, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 15, 2026 at 11:39:44AM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > > It turns out the generic disable/enable irq this_cpu_cmpxchg
> > > implementation is faster than LL/SC or lse implementation. Remove
> > > HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL for better performance on arm64.
> > > 
> > > Tested on Quad 1.9GHZ CA55 platform:
> > > average mod_node_page_state() cost decreases from 167ns to 103ns
> > > the spawn (30 duration) benchmark in unixbench is improved
> > > from 147494 lps to 150561 lps, improved by 2.1%
> > > 
> > > Tested on Quad 2.1GHZ CA73 platform:
> > > average mod_node_page_state() cost decreases from 113ns to 85ns
> > > the spawn (30 duration) benchmark in unixbench is improved
> > > from 209844 lps to 212581 lps, improved by 1.3%
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang at kernel.org>
> > 
> > Please note that mod_node_page_state() can be called in NMI context and
> > generic disable/enable irq are not safe against NMIs (newer arm arch supports
> > NMI).
> 
> hmm, interesting...
> 
> fgrep HAVE_NMI arch/*/Kconfig
> then
> fgrep HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL arch/*/Kconfig
> 
> shows that only x86, arm64, s390 and loongarch are safe, while arm,
> powerpc and mips enable HAVE_NMI but missing HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL, so
> they rely on generic generic disable/enable irq version, so you imply
> that these three arch are not safe considering mod_node_page_state()
> in NMI context.

Yes it seems like it. For memcg stats, we use ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG and
ARCH_HAS_NMI_SAFE_THIS_CPU_OPS config options to correctly handle the updates
from NMI context. Maybe we need something similar for vmstat as well.

So arm, powerpc and mips does not have ARCH_HAS_NMI_SAFE_THIS_CPU_OPS but
powerpc does have ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG and arm has
it for CPU_V7, CPU_V7M & CPU_V6K models.

I wonder if we need to add complexity for these archs.