[PATCH for-4.8 V2 08/10] powerpc: use the jump label for cpu_has_feature
Kevin Hao
haokexin at gmail.com
Mon Jul 25 21:30:43 AEST 2016
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 04:28:49PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Jul 2016 14:42:41 +0530
> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar at linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Kevin Hao <haokexin at gmail.com>
> >
> > The cpu features are fixed once the probe of cpu features are done.
> > And the function cpu_has_feature() does be used in some hot path.
> > The checking of the cpu features for each time of invoking of
> > cpu_has_feature() seems suboptimal. This tries to reduce this
> > overhead of this check by using jump label.
> >
> > The generated assemble code of the following c program:
> > if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_XXX))
> > xxx()
> >
> > Before:
> > lis r9,-16230
> > lwz r9,12324(r9)
> > lwz r9,12(r9)
> > andi. r10,r9,512
> > beqlr-
> >
> > After:
> > nop if CPU_FTR_XXX is enabled
> > b xxx if CPU_FTR_XXX is not enabled
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Hao <haokexin at gmail.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar at linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/include/asm/cputable.h | 8 ++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/cputable.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > arch/powerpc/lib/feature-fixups.c | 1 +
> > 4 files changed, 50 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpufeatures.h index
> > bfa6cb8f5629..4a4a0b898463 100644 ---
> > a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpufeatures.h +++
> > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/cpufeatures.h @@ -13,10 +13,31 @@ static
> > inline bool __cpu_has_feature(unsigned long feature)
> > return !!(CPU_FTRS_POSSIBLE & cur_cpu_spec->cpu_features & feature); }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL
> > +#include <linux/jump_label.h>
> > +
> > +extern struct static_key_true cpu_feat_keys[MAX_CPU_FEATURES];
> > +
> > +static __always_inline bool cpu_has_feature(unsigned long feature)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + if (CPU_FTRS_ALWAYS & feature)
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + if (!(CPU_FTRS_POSSIBLE & feature))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + i = __builtin_ctzl(feature);
> > + return static_branch_likely(&cpu_feat_keys[i]);
> > +}
>
> Is feature ever not-constant, or could it ever be, I wonder? We could
> do a build time check to ensure it is always constant?
In the current code, all the using of this function are passing a constant
argument. But yes, due to the implementation of jump label, we should add
a check here to ensure that a constant is passed to this function. Something
likes this:
if (!__builtin_constant_p(feature))
return __cpu_has_feature(feature);
We need the same change for the mmu_has_feature().
Thanks,
Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20160725/2c0101d9/attachment.sig>
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list