Re: [PATCH 0/8] arm64: Support FIQ controller registration

[Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>]

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 06:10:56PM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On Fri, 19 Feb 2021 11:38:56 +0000,
> Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hector's M1 support series [1] shows that some platforms have critical
> > interrupts wired to FIQ, and to support these platforms we need to support
> > handling FIQ exceptions. Other contemporary platforms don't use FIQ (since e.g.
> > this is usually routed to EL3), and as we never expect to take an FIQ, we have
> > the FIQ vector cause a panic.
> > 
> > Since the use of FIQ is a platform integration detail (which can differ across
> > bare-metal and virtualized environments), we need be able to explicitly opt-in
> > to handling FIQs while retaining the existing behaviour otherwise. This series
> > adds a new set_handle_fiq() hook so that the FIQ controller can do so, and
> > where no controller is registered the default handler will panic(). For
> > consistency the set_handle_irq() code is made to do the same.
> > 
> > The first couple of patches are from Marc's irq/drop-generic_irq_multi_handler
> > branch [2] on kernel.org, and clean up CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_MULTI_HANDLER usage.
> > The next four patches move arm64 over to a local set_handle_irq()
> > implementation, which is written to share code with a set_handle_fiq() function
> > in the last two patches. The only functional difference here is that if an IRQ
> > is somehow taken prior to set_handle_irq() the default handler will directly
> > panic() rather than the vector branching to NULL.
> > 
> > The penultimate patch is cherry-picked from the v2 M1 series, and as per
> > discussion there [3] will need a few additional fixups. I've included it for
> > now as the DAIF.IF alignment is necessary for the FIQ exception handling added
> > in the final patch.
> > 
> > The final patch adds the low-level FIQ exception handling and registration
> > mechanism atop the prior rework.
> 
> Thanks for putting this together. I have an extra patch on top of this
> series[1] that prevents the kernel from catching fire if a FIQ fires
> whilst running a guest. Nothing urgent, we can queue it at a later time.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.
> 
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git/log/?h=irq/fiq

IIUC for that "invalid_vect" should be changed to "valid_vect", to match
the other valid vector entries, but otherwise that looks sane to me.

I guess we could take that as a prerequisite ahead of the rest?

Thanks,
Mark.