Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Fix priority comparison when non-secure priorities are used
From: Alexandru Elisei <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-12 11:50:30
Also in:
lkml
Hi, After re-familiarizing myself with the spec, it starting to look to me like indeed there's something not quite right (read as: totally broken) with my patch. Arm IHI 0069F, the pseudocode for reading ICC_RPR_EL1 (page 11-797), says that the priority returned is unchanged if SCTLR_EL3.FIQ == 0. This means that the ICC_RPR_EL1 read will return the secure view (the value as it is stored by the GIC) of the priority, so for pseudo-nmis it will return (GICD_INT_NMI_PRI >> 1) | 0x80, which definitely != GICD_INT_NMI_PRI. This is further confirmed by this statement on page 4-67: "When GICD_CTLR.DS == 0, [..] For Non-secure access to ICC_PMR_EL1 and ICC_RPR_EL1 when SCR_EL3.FIQ == 0: The Secure, unshifted view applies." I don't know how I missed that during testing. Did a quick test on the model with PMU NMIs (GICD_CTRL.DS = 0, SCTLR_EL2.FIQ = 0), gic_handle_nmi() was not being called at all, but when I changed the comparison to gic_read_rpr() == ((GICD_INT_NMI_PRI >> 1) | 0x80), NMIs were being correctly handled again. Will try to run some more tests on real hardware and see if I can confirm this. Thanks, Alex On 8/11/21 7:31 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
+ Alex, who introduced this. On Wed, 11 Aug 2021 18:15:05 +0100, Chen-Yu Tsai [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
When non-secure priorities are used, compared to the raw priority set, the value read back from RPR is also right-shifted by one and the highest bit set. Add a macro to do the modifications to the raw priority when doing the comparison against the RPR value. This corrects the pseudo-NMI behavior when non-secure priorities in the GIC are used. Tested on 5.10 with the "IPI as pseudo-NMI" series [1] applied on MT8195. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1604317487-14543-1-git-send-email-sumit.garg@linaro.org/ (local) Fixes: 336780590990 ("irqchip/gic-v3: Support pseudo-NMIs when SCR_EL3.FIQ == 0") Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@chromium.org> --- drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 11 ++++++++++- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c index e0f4debe64e1..e7a0b55413db 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c@@ -100,6 +100,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(gic_pmr_sync); DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(gic_nonsecure_priorities); EXPORT_SYMBOL(gic_nonsecure_priorities); +#define GICD_INT_RPR_PRI(priority) \ + ({ \ + u32 __priority = (priority); \ + if (static_branch_unlikely(&gic_nonsecure_priorities)) \ + __priority = 0x80 | (__priority >> 1); \ + \ + __priority; \This doesn't reflect what the pseudocode says of a read of ICC_RPR_EL1 AFAICS. When the priority is activated, it is indeed shifted. But a read of RPR does appear to shift things back (and you loose the lowest bit in the process). Please see 'aarch64/support/ICC_RPR_EL1' in the architecture spec. Can you confirm that SCR_EL3.FIQ is set on your system? Thanks, M.quoted
+ }) + /* ppi_nmi_refs[n] == number of cpus having ppi[n + 16] set as NMI */ static refcount_t *ppi_nmi_refs;@@ -687,7 +696,7 @@ static asmlinkage void __exception_irq_entry gic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs return; if (gic_supports_nmi() && - unlikely(gic_read_rpr() == GICD_INT_NMI_PRI)) { + unlikely(gic_read_rpr() == GICD_INT_RPR_PRI(GICD_INT_NMI_PRI))) { gic_handle_nmi(irqnr, regs); return; }
_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel