From: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-team@meta.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, bp@alien8.de,
x86@kernel.org, nadav.amit@gmail.com, seanjc@google.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org,
Rik van Riel <riel@meta.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH v4 8/8] x86/tlb: flush the local TLB twice (DEBUG)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 16:04:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250619200442.1694583-9-riel@surriel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250619200442.1694583-1-riel@surriel.com>
From: Rik van Riel <riel@meta.com>
The RAR code attempts to flush the local TLB in addition to remote TLBs,
if the local TLB is in the cpumask. This can be seen in that the status
for the local CPU is changed from RAR_PENDING to RAR_SUCCESS.
However, it appears that the local TLB is not actually getting flushed
when the microcode flips the status to RAR_SUCCESS!
The RAR white paper suggests it should work:
"At this point, the ILP may invalidate its own TLB by signaling RAR
to itself in order to invoke the RAR handler locally as well."
I would really appreciate some guidance from Intel on how to move
forward here.
Is the RAR code doing something wrong?
Is the CPU not behaving quite as documented?
What is the best way forward?
Not-signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
---
arch/x86/mm/tlb.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
index 590742838e43..f12eff2dbcc8 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/tlb.c
@@ -1469,22 +1469,22 @@ static void rar_tlb_flush(struct flush_tlb_info *info)
{
unsigned long asid = mm_global_asid(info->mm);
cpumask_t *cpumask = mm_cpumask(info->mm);
+ int cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
u16 pcid = kern_pcid(asid);
if (info->trim_cpumask)
trim_cpumask(info);
/* Only the local CPU needs to be flushed? */
- if (cpumask_equal(cpumask, cpumask_of(raw_smp_processor_id()))) {
+ if (cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, cpumask)) {
lockdep_assert_irqs_enabled();
local_irq_disable();
flush_tlb_func(info);
local_irq_enable();
- return;
}
/* Flush all the CPUs at once with RAR. */
- if (cpumask_weight(cpumask)) {
+ if (cpumask_any_but(cpumask, cpu)) {
smp_call_rar_many(mm_cpumask(info->mm), pcid, info->start, info->end);
if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_PTI))
smp_call_rar_many(mm_cpumask(info->mm), user_pcid(asid), info->start, info->end);
--
2.49.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-19 20:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-19 20:03 [RFC PATCH v4 0/8] Intel RAR TLB invalidation Rik van Riel
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 1/8] x86/mm: Introduce Remote Action Request MSRs Rik van Riel
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 2/8] x86/mm: enable BROADCAST_TLB_FLUSH on Intel, too Rik van Riel
2025-06-26 13:08 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 3/8] x86/mm: Introduce X86_FEATURE_RAR Rik van Riel
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 4/8] x86/apic: Introduce Remote Action Request Operations Rik van Riel
2025-06-26 13:20 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-06-26 16:09 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 5/8] x86/mm: Introduce Remote Action Request Rik van Riel
2025-06-19 23:01 ` Nadav Amit
2025-06-20 1:10 ` Rik van Riel
2025-06-20 15:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-06-20 21:24 ` Nadav Amit
2025-06-23 10:50 ` David Laight
2025-06-26 15:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-06-26 15:54 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 6/8] x86/mm: use RAR for kernel TLB flushes Rik van Riel
2025-06-27 13:27 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-06-29 1:30 ` Rik van Riel
2025-06-19 20:03 ` [RFC PATCH v4 7/8] x86/mm: userspace & pageout flushing using Intel RAR Rik van Riel
2025-06-19 20:04 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2025-06-26 18:08 ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/8] Intel RAR TLB invalidation Dave Jiang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250619200442.1694583-9-riel@surriel.com \
--to=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nadav.amit@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@meta.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®