On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 06:00:43PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:
> +el0_sve_acc:
> + /*
> + * Scalable Vector Extension access
> + */
> + enable_dbg
> + ct_user_exit
> + mov x0, x25
> + mov x1, sp
> + bl do_sve_acc
> + b ret_to_user
I think do_sve_acc() runs with interrupts disabled. We may have some
high latency for large SVE states.
> +/*
> + * Trapped SVE access
> + */
> +void do_sve_acc(unsigned int esr, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + /* Even if we chose not to use SVE, the hardware could still trap: */
> + if (unlikely(!system_supports_sve()) || WARN_ON(is_compat_task())) {
> + force_signal_inject(SIGILL, ILL_ILLOPC, regs, 0);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + task_fpsimd_save();
> +
> + sve_alloc(current);
> + fpsimd_to_sve(current);
> + if (test_and_set_thread_flag(TIF_SVE))
> + WARN_ON(1); /* SVE access shouldn't have trapped */
> +
> + task_fpsimd_load();
> +}
When this function is entered, do we expect TIF_SVE to always be
cleared? It's worth adding a comment on the expected conditions. If
that's the case, task_fpsimd_save() would only save the FPSIMD state
which is fine. However, you subsequently transfer the FPSIMD state to
SVE, set TIF_SVE and restore the full SVE state. If we don't care about
the SVE state here, can we call task_fpsimd_load() *before* setting
TIF_SVE?
I may as well have confused myself with the state bouncing between
FPSIMD and SVE (more reasons to document the data flow better ;)).
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
