On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 11:42:01PM +0900, Hector Martin wrote:

On 18/02/2021 23.22, Mark Rutland wrote:

quoted

I think that for consistency we always want to keep IRQ and FIQ in-sync,
even when using GIC priorities. So when handling a pseudo-NMI we should
unmask DAIF.DA and leave DAIF.IF masked.

In that case there's one more, in daifflags.h:local_daif_restore():

			/*
			 * If interrupts are disabled but we can take
			 * asynchronous errors, we can take NMIs
			 */
			flags &= PSR_I_BIT;
			pmr = GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF;

Good spot, yes!

I did a quick scan with `git grep 'PSR_[IF]_BIT' -- arch/arm64`, and
AFAICT that's the last one.

quoted

quoted

And a minor related one: should init_gic_priority_masking() WARN if FIQ is
masked too? This probably goes with the above.

I think it should, yes.

Done for v3 then. Thanks!

Cool!

Mark.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel