Thread (9 messages) flat view 9 messages, 3 authors, 2021-08-20

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
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help