[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: framebuffer corruption due to overlapping stp instructions on arm64

On Fri, 3 Aug 2018, David Laight wrote:

> From: Ard Biesheuvel
> > Sent: 03 August 2018 10:30
> ...
> > The discussion about whether memcpy() should rely on unaligned
> > accesses, and whether you should use it on device memory is orthogonal
> > to that, and not the heart of the matter IMO
> Even on x86 using memcpy() on PCIe memory (maybe mmap()ed into userspace)
> isn't a good idea.
> In the kernel memcpy_to/fromio() ought to be a better choice but that
> is just an alternate name for memcpy().
> The problem on x86 is that memcpy() is likely to be implemented as
> 'rep movsb' on modern cpu - relying on the cpu hardware to perform
> cache-line sized transfers (etc).
> Unfortunately on uncached locations it has to revert to byte copies.
> So PCIe transfers (especially reads) are very slow.
> The transfers need to use the largest size register available.
> David

On x86, the framebuffer is mapped as write-combining memory type, so "rep
movsb" could merge the byte writes to larger chunks. I don't have a cpu
with the ERMS feature - could anyone try it if rep movsb works worse or
better than explicit writes to the framebuffer?


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-03 14:05    [W:0.122 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site