From: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rostedt@goodmis.org,
yuzenghui@huawei.com, wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com,
james.morse@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
liwei391@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/8] arm64: irqflags: Introduce explicit debugging for IRQ priorities
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2019 08:53:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e26f0761-b682-ef42-b510-53654bed1f4b@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <acc8bb85-04cb-f8af-5162-79788a5cacbb@arm.com>
On 07/06/2019 17:31, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 06/06/2019 10:31, Julien Thierry wrote:
>> Using IRQ priority masking to enable/disable interrupts is a bit
>> sensitive as it requires to deal with both ICC_PMR_EL1 and PSR.I.
>>
>> Introduce some validity checks to both highlight the states in which
>> functions dealing with IRQ enabling/disabling can (not) be called, and
>> bark a warning when called in an unexpected state.
>>
>> Since these checks are done on hotpaths, introduce a build option to
>> choose whether to do the checking.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>
>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 11 +++++++++++
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 6 ++++++
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/daifflags.h | 7 +++++++
>> arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h | 14 +++++++++++++-
>> 4 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> index 697ea05..8acc40e 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -1436,6 +1436,17 @@ config ARM64_PSEUDO_NMI
>>
>> If unsure, say N
>>
>> +if ARM64_PSEUDO_NMI
>> +config ARM64_DEBUG_PRIORITY_MASKING
>> + bool "Debug interrupt priority masking"
>> + help
>> + This adds runtime checks to functions enabling/disabling
>> + interrupts when using priority masking. The additional checks verify
>> + the validity of ICC_PMR_EL1 when calling concerned functions.
>> +
>> + If unsure, say N
>> +endif
>> +
>> config RELOCATABLE
>> bool
>> help
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>> index bc895c8..693a086 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
>> @@ -617,6 +617,12 @@ static inline bool system_uses_irq_prio_masking(void)
>> cpus_have_const_cap(ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING);
>> }
>>
>> +static inline bool system_has_prio_mask_debugging(void)
>> +{
>> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_DEBUG_PRIORITY_MASKING) &&
>> + system_uses_irq_prio_masking();
>> +}
>> +
>> #define ARM64_SSBD_UNKNOWN -1
>> #define ARM64_SSBD_FORCE_DISABLE 0
>> #define ARM64_SSBD_KERNEL 1
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/daifflags.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/daifflags.h
>> index f93204f..eca5bee 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/daifflags.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/daifflags.h
>> @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@
>> /* mask/save/unmask/restore all exceptions, including interrupts. */
>> static inline void local_daif_mask(void)
>> {
>> + WARN_ON(system_has_prio_mask_debugging() &&
>> + (read_sysreg_s(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1) == (GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF |
>> + GIC_PRIO_PSR_I_SET)));
>> +
>> asm volatile(
>> "msr daifset, #0xf // local_daif_mask\n"
>> :
>> @@ -62,6 +66,9 @@ static inline void local_daif_restore(unsigned long flags)
>> {
>> bool irq_disabled = flags & PSR_I_BIT;
>>
>> + WARN_ON(system_has_prio_mask_debugging() &&
>> + !(read_sysreg(daif) & PSR_I_BIT));
>> +
>> if (!irq_disabled) {
>> trace_hardirqs_on();
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h
>> index b6f757f..cac2d2a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/irqflags.h
>> @@ -40,6 +40,12 @@
>> */
>> static inline void arch_local_irq_enable(void)
>> {
>> + if (system_has_prio_mask_debugging()) {
>> + u32 pmr = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1);
>> +
>> + WARN_ON_ONCE(pmr != GIC_PRIO_IRQON && pmr != GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF);
>> + }
>> +
>> asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
>> "msr daifclr, #2 // arch_local_irq_enable\n"
>> "nop",
>> @@ -53,6 +59,12 @@ static inline void arch_local_irq_enable(void)
>>
>> static inline void arch_local_irq_disable(void)
>> {
>> + if (system_has_prio_mask_debugging()) {
>> + u32 pmr = read_sysreg_s(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1);
>> +
>> + WARN_ON_ONCE(pmr != GIC_PRIO_IRQON && pmr != GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF);
>> + }
>> +
>> asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
>> "msr daifset, #2 // arch_local_irq_disable",
>> __msr_s(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1, "%0"),
>> @@ -86,7 +98,7 @@ static inline int arch_irqs_disabled_flags(unsigned long flags)
>>
>> asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
>> "and %w0, %w1, #" __stringify(PSR_I_BIT),
>> - "eor %w0, %w1, #" __stringify(GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF),
>> + "eor %w0, %w1, #" __stringify(GIC_PRIO_IRQON),
>
> Err... Which version is the correct one? This one, or the previous one?
>
Argh, bad fixup of the patches. This one is the correct one (any state
!= GIC_PRIO_IRQON means interrupts are disabled), but the correct value
should already be in use in the previous patch.
Will fix that in the next posting.
Thanks,
--
Julien Thierry
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-10 7:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-06 9:31 [PATCH v3 0/8] arm64: IRQ priority masking and Pseudo-NMI fixes Julien Thierry
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 1/8] arm64: Do not enable IRQs for ct_user_exit Julien Thierry
2019-06-07 9:25 ` James Morse
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 2/8] arm64: irqflags: Pass flags as readonly operand to restore instruction Julien Thierry
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/8] arm64: irqflags: Add condition flags to inline asm clobber list Julien Thierry
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 4/8] arm64: Fix interrupt tracing in the presence of NMIs Julien Thierry
2019-06-07 15:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-06-07 15:54 ` Julien Thierry
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 5/8] arm64: Fix incorrect irqflag restore for priority masking Julien Thierry
2019-06-07 16:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-06-10 7:49 ` Julien Thierry
2019-06-10 11:36 ` Julien Thierry
2019-06-10 11:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 6/8] arm64: irqflags: Introduce explicit debugging for IRQ priorities Julien Thierry
2019-06-07 16:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-06-10 7:53 ` Julien Thierry [this message]
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 7/8] arm64: fix kernel stack overflow in kdump capture kernel Julien Thierry
2019-06-06 9:31 ` [PATCH v3 8/8] arm64: Allow selecting Pseudo-NMI again 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=e26f0761-b682-ef42-b510-53654bed1f4b@arm.com \
--to=julien.thierry@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liwei391@huawei.com \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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