mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, peterz@infradead.org,
	suzuki.poulose@arm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, will.deacon@arm.com,
	Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] arm64/cpufeature: don't use mutex in bringup path
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:36:47 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d037877-6fac-bf9c-ecf3-74b2e72b97f6@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1494584120-15208-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>

On 12/05/17 11:15, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Currently, cpus_set_cap() calls static_branch_enable_cpuslocked(), which
> must take the jump_label mutex.
> 
> We call cpus_set_cap() in the secondary bringup path, from the idle
> thread where interrupts are disabled. Taking a mutex in this path "is a
> NONO" regardless of whether it's contended, and something we must avoid.
> Additionally, the secondary CPU doesn't hold the percpu rwsem (as this
> is held by the primary CPU), so this triggers a lockdep splat.
> 
> This patch fixes both issues. The poking of static keys is deferred
> until enable_cpu_capabilities(), which runs in a suitable context on the
> boot CPU. To account for the static keys being set later,
> cpus_have_const_cap() is updated to use another static key to check
> whether the const cap keys have been initialised, falling back to the
> caps bitmap until this is the case.
> 
> This means that users of cpus_have_const_cap() gain should only gain a
> single additional NOP in the fast path once the const caps are
> initialised, but should always see the current cap value.
> 
> The hyp code should never dereference the caps array, since the caps are
> initialized before we run the module initcall to initialise hyp. A check
> is added to the hyp init code to docuemnt this requirement.
> 
> This rework means that we can remove the *_cpuslocked() helpers added in
> commit d54bb72551b999dd ("arm64/cpufeature: Use
> static_branch_enable_cpuslocked()").
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
> Cc: Marc Zyniger <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Cc: Sebastian Sewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 13 ++++++++++---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h   |  8 ++++++--
>  arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c      |  9 +--------
>  arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c      | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> Catalin, Will, assuming you're happy with the patch, it will need to go via the
> tip tree.
> 
> Since v1 [1]:
> * Kill redundant update_cpu_errata_workarounds() prototype
> * Introduce arm64_const_caps_ready
> Since v2 [2]:
> * Add hyp init check
> * Clean up commit message
> * Drop fixes tag
> 
> [1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-May/505731.html
> [2] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-May/505763.html

Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-12 10:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-12 10:15 Mark Rutland
2017-05-12 10:36 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2017-05-12 12:03 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2017-05-12 17:07 ` Will Deacon
2017-05-12 17:32   ` Mark Rutland

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=8d037877-6fac-bf9c-ecf3-74b2e72b97f6@arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=christoffer.dall@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®