mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>,
	Jason Sequeira <jsequeira@nvidia.com>,
	jgg@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: errata: Workaround NVIDIA Olympus device store/load ordering erratum
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2026 08:20:28 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <223c49ee-528c-4750-9885-fd8e0247151e@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ailKYTOX23EMnJsK@willie-the-truck>

Hi Will,

On 6/10/2026 6:28 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> [+Jason G]
>
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2026 at 09:45:51AM -0500, Shanker Donthineni wrote:
>> On systems with NVIDIA Olympus cores, a Device-nGnR* load can be
>> observed by a peripheral before an older, non-overlapping Device-nGnR*
>> store to the same peripheral. This breaks the program-order guarantee
>> that software expects for Device-nGnR* accesses and can leave a
>> peripheral in an incorrect state, as a load is observed before an
>> earlier store takes effect.
>>
>> The erratum can occur only when all of the following apply:
>>
>>    - A PE executes a Device-nGnR* store followed by a younger
>>      Device-nGnR* load.
>>    - The store is not a store-release.
>>    - The accesses target the same peripheral and do not overlap in bytes.
>>    - There is at most one intervening Device-nGnR* store in program
>>      order, and there are no intervening Device-nGnR* loads.
>>    - There is no DSB, and no DMB that orders loads, between the store and
>>      the load.
>>    - Specific micro-architectural and timing conditions occur.
>>
>> Two ways to restore ordering: insert a barrier (any DSB, or a DMB that
>> orders loads) between the store and the load, or make the store a
>> store-release. A load-acquire on the load side would not help, because
>> acquire semantics do not prevent a load from being observed ahead of an
>> older store; only the store side (release or a barrier) closes the
>> window.
> I think you can drop the paragraph above. A store-release isn't enough
> to order against a later load in the architecture either, so we're
> clearly in micro-architecture territory and I don't think you need to
> describe mechanisms that don't work here.
>
>> Promote the raw MMIO store helpers (__raw_writeb/w/l/q) from plain str*
>> to stlr* (Store-Release), which removes the "store is not a
>> store-release" condition for every device write the kernel issues.
>> Because writel() and writel_relaxed() are both built on __raw_writel()
>> in asm-generic/io.h, patching the raw variants covers both the
>> non-relaxed and relaxed APIs without touching the higher layers. Note
>> that writel()'s own barrier sits before the store, so it does not order
>> the store against a subsequent readl(); the store-release promotion is
>> what provides that ordering.

Based on the existing code comments and after reviewing this path again,
__const_memcpy_toio_aligned32() and __const_memcpy_toio_aligned64()
appear to be intended for WC regions. Since the erratum is scoped to
Device-nGnR* accesses, and WC mappings are Normal-NC on arm64, I don’t
think the STLR workaround should apply to these helpers by default.

Applying it there would also break the contiguous STR grouping that
this path relies on for write combining.

-Shanker



  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-10 13:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-05 14:45 Shanker Donthineni
2026-06-10 11:28 ` Will Deacon
2026-06-10 12:50   ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-06-10 12:53   ` Shanker Donthineni
2026-06-10 13:20   ` Shanker Donthineni [this message]
2026-06-10 16:11     ` Jason Gunthorpe

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=223c49ee-528c-4750-9885-fd8e0247151e@nvidia.com \
    --to=sdonthineni@nvidia.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=jsequeira@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=vladimir.murzin@arm.com \
    --cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®