Re: [PATCH v2] arm: Added support for getcpu() vDSO using TPIDRURW
From: Mark Rutland
Date: Tue Oct 04 2016 - 13:08:13 EST
On Tue, Oct 04, 2016 at 05:35:33PM +0200, Fredrik Markstrom wrote:
> This makes getcpu() ~1000 times faster, this is very useful when
> implementing per-cpu buffers in userspace (to avoid cache line
> bouncing). As an example lttng ust becomes ~30% faster.
> The patch will break applications using TPIDRURW (which is context switched
> since commit 4780adeefd042482f624f5e0d577bf9cdcbb760 ("ARM: 7735/2:
It looks like you dropped the leading 'a' from the commit ID. For
everyone else's benefit, the full ID is:
Please note that arm64 has done similar for compat tasks since commit:
d00a3810c16207d2 ("arm64: context-switch user tls register tpidr_el0 for
> Preserve the user r/w register TPIDRURW on context switch and fork")) and
> is therefore made configurable.
As you note above, this is an ABI break and *will* break some existing
applications. That's generally a no-go.
This also leaves arm64's compat with the existing behaviour, differing
I was under the impression that other mechanisms were being considered
for fast userspace access to per-cpu data structures, e.g. restartable
sequences. What is the state of those? Why is this better?
If getcpu() specifically is necessary, is there no other way to
> +notrace int __vdso_getcpu(unsigned int *cpup, unsigned int *nodep,
> + struct getcpu_cache *tcache)
> + unsigned long node_and_cpu;
> + asm("mrc p15, 0, %0, c13, c0, 2\n" : "=r"(node_and_cpu));
> + if (nodep)
> + *nodep = cpu_to_node(node_and_cpu >> 16);
> + if (cpup)
> + *cpup = node_and_cpu & 0xffffUL;
Given this is directly user-accessible, this format is a de-facto ABI,
even if it's not documented as such. Is this definitely the format you