Excerpts from Michael Ellerman's message of July 9, 2020 8:53 pm:

Nicholas Piggin [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
---
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h           | 28 ++++++++
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h          | 66 +++++++++++++++++++
 arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock_paravirt.h |  7 ++
 arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig        |  5 ++
 arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c        |  6 +-
 include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h               |  2 +

Another ack?

quoted

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h
index 7a8546660a63..f2d51f929cf5 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/paravirt.h

@@ -45,6 +55,19 @@ static inline void yield_to_preempted(int cpu, u32 yield_count)
 {
 	___bad_yield_to_preempted(); /* This would be a bug */
 }
+
+extern void ___bad_yield_to_any(void);
+static inline void yield_to_any(void)
+{
+	___bad_yield_to_any(); /* This would be a bug */
+}

Why do we do that rather than just not defining yield_to_any() at all
and letting the build fail on that?

There's a condition somewhere that we know will false at compile time
and drop the call before linking?

Mainly so you could use it in if (IS_ENABLED()) blocks, but would still
catch the (presumably buggy) case where something calls it without the
option set.

I think I had it arranged a different way that was using IS_ENABLED 
earlier and changed it but might as well keep it this way.

quoted

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock_paravirt.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock_paravirt.h
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..750d1b5e0202
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock_paravirt.h

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */
+#ifndef __ASM_QSPINLOCK_PARAVIRT_H
+#define __ASM_QSPINLOCK_PARAVIRT_H

_ASM_POWERPC_QSPINLOCK_PARAVIRT_H please.

quoted

+
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(__pv_queued_spin_unlock);

Why's that in a header? Should that (eventually) go with the generic implementation?

Yeah the qspinlock_paravirt.h header is a bit weird and only gets 
included into kernel/locking/qspinlock.c

quoted

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig
index 24c18362e5ea..756e727b383f 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/Kconfig

@@ -25,9 +25,14 @@ config PPC_PSERIES
 	select SWIOTLB
 	default y
 
+config PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
+	bool
+	default n

default n is the default.

quoted

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c
index 2db8469e475f..747a203d9453 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/setup.c

@@ -771,8 +771,12 @@ static void __init pSeries_setup_arch(void)
 	if (firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_LPAR)) {
 		vpa_init(boot_cpuid);
 
-		if (lppaca_shared_proc(get_lppaca()))
+		if (lppaca_shared_proc(get_lppaca())) {
 			static_branch_enable(&shared_processor);
+#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS
+			pv_spinlocks_init();
+#endif
+		}

We could avoid the ifdef with this I think?

Yes I think so.

Thanks,
Nick