From: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, daniel.thompson@linaro.org,
joel@joelfernandes.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
mark.rutland@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com,
james.morse@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
will.deacon@arm.com, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 15/27] arm64: irqflags: Use ICC_PMR_EL1 for interrupt masking
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2018 18:39:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1675f220-e4c3-b1e2-7842-901bec8eee19@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1535471497-38854-16-git-send-email-julien.thierry@arm.com>
Hi,
On 28/08/18 16:51, Julien Thierry wrote:
> Instead disabling interrupts by setting the PSR.I bit, use a priority
> higher than the one used for interrupts to mask them via PMR.
>
> The value chosen for PMR to enable/disable interrupts encodes the status
> of interrupts on a single bit. This information is stored in the irqflags
> values used when saving/restoring IRQ status.
>
> Tested-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>
> Suggested-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h | 17 ++++++-
> arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h | 3 +-
> arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h | 10 ++--
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S | 2 +-
> 5 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
> index 0bcc98d..0b2dcfd 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/assembler.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
> #ifndef __ASM_ASSEMBLER_H
> #define __ASM_ASSEMBLER_H
>
> +#include <asm/alternative.h>
> #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
> #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
> #include <asm/debug-monitors.h>
> @@ -62,12 +63,24 @@
> /*
> * Enable and disable interrupts.
> */
> - .macro disable_irq
> + .macro disable_irq, tmp
> + mov \tmp, #ICC_PMR_EL1_MASKED
> +alternative_if_not ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING
> msr daifset, #2
> +alternative_else
> + msr_s SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1, \tmp
> +alternative_endif
> .endm
>
> - .macro enable_irq
> + .macro enable_irq, tmp
> + mov \tmp, #ICC_PMR_EL1_UNMASKED
> +alternative_if_not ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING
> msr daifclr, #2
> + nop
> +alternative_else
> + msr_s SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1, \tmp
> + dsb sy
> +alternative_endif
> .endm
>
> .macro save_and_disable_irq, flags
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h
> index 7ed3208..3e06891 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/efi.h
> @@ -42,7 +42,8 @@
>
> efi_status_t __efi_rt_asm_wrapper(void *, const char *, ...);
>
> -#define ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK (PSR_D_BIT | PSR_A_BIT | PSR_I_BIT | PSR_F_BIT)
> +#define ARCH_EFI_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK \
> + (PSR_D_BIT | PSR_A_BIT | PSR_I_BIT | PSR_F_BIT | ARCH_FLAG_PMR_EN)
>
> /* arch specific definitions used by the stub code */
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h
> index 24692ed..193cfd0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h
> @@ -18,7 +18,27 @@
>
> #ifdef __KERNEL__
>
> +#include <asm/alternative.h>
> +#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
> #include <asm/ptrace.h>
> +#include <asm/sysreg.h>
> +
> +
> +/*
> + * When ICC_PMR_EL1 is used for interrupt masking, only the bit indicating
> + * whether the normal interrupts are masked is kept along with the daif
> + * flags.
> + */
> +#define ARCH_FLAG_PMR_EN 0x1
> +
> +#define MAKE_ARCH_FLAGS(daif, pmr) \
> + ((daif) | (((pmr) >> ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_SHIFT) & ARCH_FLAG_PMR_EN))
> +
> +#define ARCH_FLAGS_GET_PMR(flags) \
> + ((((flags) & ARCH_FLAG_PMR_EN) << ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_SHIFT) \
> + | ICC_PMR_EL1_MASKED)
> +
> +#define ARCH_FLAGS_GET_DAIF(flags) ((flags) & ~ARCH_FLAG_PMR_EN)
>
> /*
> * Aarch64 has flags for masking: Debug, Asynchronous (serror), Interrupts and
> @@ -38,31 +58,50 @@
> */
> static inline unsigned long arch_local_irq_save(void)
> {
> - unsigned long flags;
> - asm volatile(
> + unsigned long flags, masked = ICC_PMR_EL1_MASKED;
> + unsigned long pmr = 0;
> +
> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> "mrs %0, daif // arch_local_irq_save\n"
> - "msr daifset, #2"
> - : "=r" (flags)
> - :
> + "msr daifset, #2\n"
> + "mov %1, #" __stringify(ICC_PMR_EL1_UNMASKED),
> + /* --- */
> + "mrs %0, daif\n"
> + "mrs_s %1, " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1) "\n"
> + "msr_s " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1) ", %2",
> + ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING)
> + : "=&r" (flags), "=&r" (pmr)
> + : "r" (masked)
> : "memory");
> - return flags;
> +
> + return MAKE_ARCH_FLAGS(flags, pmr);
> }
>
> static inline void arch_local_irq_enable(void)
> {
> - asm volatile(
> - "msr daifclr, #2 // arch_local_irq_enable"
> - :
> + unsigned long unmasked = ICC_PMR_EL1_UNMASKED;
> +
> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> + "msr daifclr, #2 // arch_local_irq_enable\n"
> + "nop",
> + "msr_s " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1) ",%0\n"
> + "dsb sy",
> + ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING)
> :
> + : "r" (unmasked)
> : "memory");
> }
>
> static inline void arch_local_irq_disable(void)
> {
> - asm volatile(
> - "msr daifset, #2 // arch_local_irq_disable"
> - :
> + unsigned long masked = ICC_PMR_EL1_MASKED;
> +
> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> + "msr daifset, #2 // arch_local_irq_disable",
> + "msr_s " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1) ",%0",
> + ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING)
> :
> + : "r" (masked)
> : "memory");
> }
>
> @@ -72,12 +111,19 @@ static inline void arch_local_irq_disable(void)
> static inline unsigned long arch_local_save_flags(void)
> {
> unsigned long flags;
> - asm volatile(
> - "mrs %0, daif // arch_local_save_flags"
> - : "=r" (flags)
> + unsigned long pmr = 0;
> +
> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> + "mrs %0, daif // arch_local_save_flags\n"
> + "mov %1, #" __stringify(ICC_PMR_EL1_UNMASKED),
> + "mrs %0, daif\n"
> + "mrs_s %1, " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1),
> + ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING)
> + : "=r" (flags), "=r" (pmr)
> :
> : "memory");
> - return flags;
> +
> + return MAKE_ARCH_FLAGS(flags, pmr);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -85,16 +131,27 @@ static inline unsigned long arch_local_save_flags(void)
> */
> static inline void arch_local_irq_restore(unsigned long flags)
> {
> - asm volatile(
> - "msr daif, %0 // arch_local_irq_restore"
> + unsigned long pmr = ARCH_FLAGS_GET_PMR(flags);
> +
> + flags = ARCH_FLAGS_GET_DAIF(flags);
> +
> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> + "msr daif, %0 // arch_local_irq_restore\n"
> + "nop\n"
> + "nop",
> + "msr daif, %0\n"
> + "msr_s " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1) ",%1\n"
> + "dsb sy",
I've come to realize there is an issue with that sequence. If the CPU
has { PSR.I = 1, PMR = unmasked }, attempting attempting to restore
flags { PSR.I = 0, PMR = masked }, there will be that ever so small
window between the two instructions where interrupts get re-enabled
while both contexts (the current one and the one being restored) have
interrupts disabled...
Does that ever happen? Yes, when coming from a kernel entry or coming
back from a VHE guest and doing "local_daif_retore(DAIF_PROCCTX_NOIRQ)".
An obvious, always working solution would be to do:
msr daifset, #2
msr ICC_PMR_EL1, %1
msr daif, %0
dsb sy
This however has some heavy performance hit on hackbench (~4-5%).
So I'd suggest:
msr ICC_PMR_EL1, %1
msr daif, %0
dsb sy
So, this only reverses the issue to the case where we restore { PSR.I =
1, PMR = unmasked } while CPU has { PSR.I = 0, PMR = masked }?
Yes, *but* there is no reason this should happen:
- There is no pre-defined flags values that provide { PSR.I = 1, PMR =
unmasked } (and there is no reason to be one once we start using priorities)
- If flags { PMR = unmasked, PSR.I = 1 } where obtained through
local_irq_save() or local_irq_save_flags(), from that point one would
need to mask PMR *and* explicitly modify PSR.I since local_enable_irq()
no longer touches PSR.
The only code that has a reason to do this explicit change is PMR setup
code at CPU startup and when coming from exception entry. And code doing
such action has no reason to be between local_irq_save/restore() calls
since that would simply undo its action...
So my take is that restoring the PMR register first is fine without
masking PSR.I with the following comment:
/*
* Code switching from PSR.I interrupt disabling to PMR masking
* should not lie between consecutive calls to local_irq_save()
* and local_irq_restore() in the same context.
*/
Does this approach seem sound? (If my explanation was not to confusing)
Am I missing some corner case?
Any suggestions for better approach? Or better wording?
Thanks,
> + ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING)
> :
> - : "r" (flags)
> + : "r" (flags), "r" (pmr)
> : "memory");
> }
>
> static inline int arch_irqs_disabled_flags(unsigned long flags)
> {
> - return flags & PSR_I_BIT;
> + return (ARCH_FLAGS_GET_DAIF(flags) & (PSR_I_BIT)) |
> + !(ARCH_FLAGS_GET_PMR(flags) & ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_BIT);
> }
> #endif
> #endif
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> index 29ec217..67df46e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h
> @@ -25,8 +25,11 @@
> #define CurrentEL_EL1 (1 << 2)
> #define CurrentEL_EL2 (2 << 2)
>
> -/* PMR value use to unmask interrupts */
> +/* PMR values used to mask/unmask interrupts */
> #define ICC_PMR_EL1_UNMASKED 0xf0
> +#define ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_SHIFT 6
> +#define ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_BIT (1 << ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_SHIFT) // PMR IRQ enable
> +#define ICC_PMR_EL1_MASKED (ICC_PMR_EL1_UNMASKED ^ ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_BIT)
>
> /* AArch32-specific ptrace requests */
> #define COMPAT_PTRACE_GETREGS 12
> @@ -201,8 +204,9 @@ static inline void forget_syscall(struct pt_regs *regs)
> #define processor_mode(regs) \
> ((regs)->pstate & PSR_MODE_MASK)
>
> -#define interrupts_enabled(regs) \
> - (!((regs)->pstate & PSR_I_BIT))
> +#define interrupts_enabled(regs) \
> + ((!((regs)->pstate & PSR_I_BIT)) && \
> + ((regs)->pmr_save & ICC_PMR_EL1_EN_BIT))
>
> #define fast_interrupts_enabled(regs) \
> (!((regs)->pstate & PSR_F_BIT))
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S
> index 79b06af..91e1e3d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S
> @@ -912,7 +912,7 @@ work_pending:
> * "slow" syscall return path.
> */
> ret_to_user:
> - disable_irq // disable interrupts
> + disable_irq x21 // disable interrupts
> ldr x1, [tsk, #TSK_TI_FLAGS]
> and x2, x1, #_TIF_WORK_MASK
> cbnz x2, work_pending
> --
> 1.9.1
>
--
Julien Thierry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-21 17:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-28 15:51 [PATCH v5 00/27] arm64: provide pseudo NMI with GICv3 Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 01/27] arm64: cpufeature: Set SYSREG_GIC_CPUIF as a boot system feature Julien Thierry
2018-09-21 15:56 ` Marc Zyngier
[not found] ` <MWHPR0601MB3707D7CF3B55BF40EEEA0D52C4160@MWHPR0601MB3707.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
2018-09-25 8:13 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 02/27] arm64: cpufeature: Use alternatives for VHE cpu_enable Julien Thierry
2018-09-12 10:28 ` James Morse
2018-09-12 12:03 ` Julien Thierry
2018-09-18 17:46 ` James Morse
2018-09-12 12:37 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 03/27] arm64: alternative: Apply alternatives early in boot process Julien Thierry
2018-09-12 10:29 ` James Morse
2018-09-12 16:49 ` Julien Thierry
2018-09-17 23:44 ` Daniel Thompson
2018-09-18 7:37 ` Julien Thierry
2018-09-18 17:47 ` James Morse
2018-09-21 16:05 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 04/27] arm64: daifflags: Use irqflags functions for daifflags Julien Thierry
2018-09-12 12:28 ` James Morse
2018-10-03 15:09 ` Catalin Marinas
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 05/27] arm64: Use daifflag_restore after bp_hardening Julien Thierry
2018-09-12 10:32 ` James Morse
2018-09-12 11:11 ` Julien Thierry
2018-09-12 12:28 ` James Morse
2018-09-12 13:03 ` Julien Thierry
2018-10-03 15:12 ` Catalin Marinas
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 06/27] arm64: Delay daif masking for user return Julien Thierry
2018-09-12 10:31 ` James Morse
2018-09-12 13:07 ` Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 07/27] arm64: xen: Use existing helper to check interrupt status Julien Thierry
2018-08-29 21:35 ` Stefano Stabellini
2018-10-03 15:14 ` Catalin Marinas
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 08/27] irqchip/gic: Unify GIC priority definitions Julien Thierry
2018-10-03 9:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 09/27] irqchip/gic: Lower priority of GIC interrupts Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 10/27] arm64: cpufeature: Add cpufeature for IRQ priority masking Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 11/27] arm64: Make PMR part of task context Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 12/27] arm64: Unmask PMR before going idle Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 13/27] arm/arm64: gic-v3: Add helper functions to manage IRQ priorities Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 14/27] arm64: kvm: Unmask PMR before entering guest Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 15/27] arm64: irqflags: Use ICC_PMR_EL1 for interrupt masking Julien Thierry
2018-09-21 17:39 ` Julien Thierry [this message]
2018-09-21 17:55 ` Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 16/27] arm64: daifflags: Include PMR in daifflags restore operations Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 17/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Factor group0 detection into functions Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 18/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Do not overwrite PMR value Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 19/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Remove acknowledge loop Julien Thierry
2018-10-03 9:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 20/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Switch to PMR masking after IRQ acknowledge Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 21/27] arm64: Switch to PMR masking when starting CPUs Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 22/27] arm64: Add build option for IRQ masking via priority Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 23/27] arm64: Handle serror in NMI context Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 24/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Detect current view of GIC priorities Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 25/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Add base support for pseudo-NMI Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 26/27] irqchip/gic: Add functions to access irq priorities Julien Thierry
2018-08-28 15:51 ` [PATCH v5 27/27] irqchip/gic-v3: Allow interrupts to be set as pseudo-NMI Julien Thierry
2018-08-29 11:37 ` [PATCH v5 00/27] arm64: provide pseudo NMI with GICv3 Daniel Thompson
2018-08-29 12:58 ` Julien Thierry
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1675f220-e4c3-b1e2-7842-901bec8eee19@arm.com \
--to=julien.thierry@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=christoffer.dall@arm.com \
--cc=daniel.thompson@linaro.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome