Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: Rename WORKAROUND_1165522 to SPECULATIVE_AT
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Date: 2019-11-11 17:16:47
Also in:
kvmarm, lkml
On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 04:07:39PM +0000, Steven Price wrote:
On 11/11/2019 15:42, Marc Zyngier wrote:quoted
quoted
+config ARM64_WORKAROUND_SPECULATIVE_AT + bool + config ARM64_ERRATUM_1165522 bool "Cortex-A76: Speculative AT instruction using out-of-context translation regime could cause subsequent request to generate an incorrect translation" default y + select ARM64_WORKAROUND_SPECULATIVE_ATI'd object that ARM64_ERRATUM_1319367 (and its big brother 1319537) are also related to speculative AT execution, and yet are not covered by this configuration symbol.Good point.quoted
I can see three solutions to this: - Either you call it SPECULATIVE_AT_VHE and introduce SPECULATIVE_AT_NVHE for symmetryTempting...
FWIW, this sounds fine to me.
quoted
- Or you make SPECULATIVE_AT cover all the speculative AT errata, which may or may not work...This actually sounds the neatest, but I'm not sure whether there's going to be any conflicts between VHE/NVHE. I'll prototype this and see how ugly it is.quoted
- Or even better, you just ammend the documentation to say that 1165522 also covers the newly found A55 one (just like we have for A57/A72)Well Mark Rutland disliked my initial thoughts about just including both errata in one option like that - hence the refactoring in this patch. Although of course that's exactly what's happened with 1319367/1319537...
My view on this is that using one erratum config symbol to cover the workaround for another is more confusing than having a level of indirection, and I would've preferred the indirection for that case too.
quoted
What do you think?I'll have a go at SPECULATIVE_AT covering both VHE/NVHE - from an initial look it seems like it should work and it would be neat if it does. In particular it should avoid the necessity to require VHE when the erratum is present. Otherwise I guess SPECULATIVE_AT_{,N}VHE is probably second best.
Both sound good to me. Thanks for dealing with this! Mark. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel