On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 08:21:11PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 06:32:06AM -0700, Catalin Marinas wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 06:00:42PM +0100, Dave P Martin wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/proc.S b/arch/arm64/mm/proc.S
index 877d42f..dd22ef2 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/proc.S
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/proc.S

@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
 #include <asm/pgtable-hwdef.h>
 #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
 #include <asm/alternative.h>
+#include <asm/sysreg.h>
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_64K_PAGES
 #define TCR_TG_FLAGS	TCR_TG0_64K | TCR_TG1_64K

@@ -186,8 +187,17 @@ ENTRY(__cpu_setup)
 	tlbi	vmalle1				// Invalidate local TLB
 	dsb	nsh
 
-	mov	x0, #3 << 20
-	msr	cpacr_el1, x0			// Enable FP/ASIMD
+	mov	x0, #3 << 20			// FEN
+
+	/* SVE */
+	mrs	x5, id_aa64pfr0_el1
+	ubfx	x5, x5, #ID_AA64PFR0_SVE_SHIFT, #4
+	cbz	x5, 1f
+
+	bic	x0, x0, #CPACR_EL1_ZEN
+	orr	x0, x0, #CPACR_EL1_ZEN_EL1EN	// SVE: trap for EL0, not EL1
+1:	msr	cpacr_el1, x0			// Enable FP/ASIMD

For EL1, I wonder whether we could move this later to cpufeature.c. IIRC
I tried to do the same with FPSIMD but hit an issue with EFI run-time
services (I may be wrong though).

I'll take a look at this -- I believe it should be safe to disable this
trap for EL1 relatively late.  This is needed before probing for
available vector lengths, but apart from that the kernel shouldn't touch
SVE until/unless some user task uses SVE.

This would change if we eventually enable kernel-mode SVE, but I wouldn't
expect that to get used in early boot before the cpufeatures code runs.

Ard may have a view on this.

I've had a go at this, but there's a lot of splatter.

I can add a helper el1_enable_sve() say, and call it before probing
ZCR_EL1 in the cpufeatures code.

This makes enabling SVE a side-effect of the cpufeatures code, which
I'm not that comfortable with -- it feels like something that later
refactoring could easily break.

I can also add an explicit call to el1_enable_sve() in sve_setup(),
but this only works on the boot cpu.

For secondaries, I could add something in secondary_start_kernel(),
but this looks incongruous since there's no other call to do something
similar yet.


** Suzuki, do we have any other case where the trap for a CPU feature is
turned off by the cpufeatures code?  If there's already a template for
this then I'm happy to follow it.

Otherwise, maybe it's simpler to keep it in __cpu_setup after all
since that's a common path that all CPUs pass through.

Cheers
---Dave