Subject: [PATCH v3 05/22] arm64: KVM: Implement vgic-v3 save/restore

From: [email-masked] (Mario Smarduch)
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 18:14:36 -0800

On 12/7/2015 10:20 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 07/12/15 18:05, Mario Smarduch wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/7/2015 9:37 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
[...]
>>>
>>
>> I was thinking something like 'current_lr[VGIC_V3_LR_INDEX(...)]'.
> 
> That doesn't change anything, the compiler is perfectly able to 
> optimize something like this:
> 
> [...]
> ffffffc0007f31ac:       38624862        ldrb    w2, [x3,w2,uxtw]
> ffffffc0007f31b0:       10000063        adr     x3, ffffffc0007f31bc <__vgic_v3_save_state+0x64>
> ffffffc0007f31b4:       8b228862        add     x2, x3, w2, sxtb #2
> ffffffc0007f31b8:       d61f0040        br      x2
> ffffffc0007f31bc:       d53ccde2        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_7
> ffffffc0007f31c0:       f9001c02        str     x2, [x0,#56]
> ffffffc0007f31c4:       d53ccdc2        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_6
> ffffffc0007f31c8:       f9002002        str     x2, [x0,#64]
> ffffffc0007f31cc:       d53ccda2        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_5
> ffffffc0007f31d0:       f9002402        str     x2, [x0,#72]
> ffffffc0007f31d4:       d53ccd82        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_4
> ffffffc0007f31d8:       f9002802        str     x2, [x0,#80]
> ffffffc0007f31dc:       d53ccd62        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_3
> ffffffc0007f31e0:       f9002c02        str     x2, [x0,#88]
> ffffffc0007f31e4:       d53ccd42        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_2
> ffffffc0007f31e8:       f9003002        str     x2, [x0,#96]
> ffffffc0007f31ec:       d53ccd22        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_1
> ffffffc0007f31f0:       f9003402        str     x2, [x0,#104]
> ffffffc0007f31f4:       d53ccd02        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c13_0
> ffffffc0007f31f8:       f9003802        str     x2, [x0,#112]
> ffffffc0007f31fc:       d53ccce2        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_7
> ffffffc0007f3200:       f9003c02        str     x2, [x0,#120]
> ffffffc0007f3204:       d53cccc2        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_6
> ffffffc0007f3208:       f9004002        str     x2, [x0,#128]
> ffffffc0007f320c:       d53ccca2        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_5
> ffffffc0007f3210:       f9004402        str     x2, [x0,#136]
> ffffffc0007f3214:       d53ccc82        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_4
> ffffffc0007f3218:       f9004802        str     x2, [x0,#144]
> ffffffc0007f321c:       d53ccc62        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_3
> ffffffc0007f3220:       f9004c02        str     x2, [x0,#152]
> ffffffc0007f3224:       d53ccc42        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_2
> ffffffc0007f3228:       f9005002        str     x2, [x0,#160]
> ffffffc0007f322c:       d53ccc22        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_1
> ffffffc0007f3230:       f9005402        str     x2, [x0,#168]
> ffffffc0007f3234:       d53ccc02        mrs     x2, s3_4_c12_c12_0
> ffffffc0007f3238:       7100183f        cmp     w1, #0x6
> ffffffc0007f323c:       f9005802        str     x2, [x0,#176]
> 
> As you can see, this is as optimal as it gets, short of being able
> to find a nice way to use more than one register...

Interesting, thanks for the dump I'm no expert on pipeline optimizations but I'm
wondering with these system register accesses can these be executed out of order
provided you didn't have what I thinks are write after read dependencies?
It's only 4 registers here, there are some other longer stretches in subsequent
patches.

I minor note here is some white space in this patch.
> Thanks,
> 	M.