[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140917121820.GR12361@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:18:20 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: hw_breakpoint: Trap undef instruction exceptions
on wake-up
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:57:16PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> If power area D4, which contains the Coresight-ETM hardware block, is
> powered down on R-Mobile A1 (r8a7740), the kernel crashes when
> suspending from s2ram with:
>
> Internal error: Oops - undefined instruction: 0 [#1] ARM
>
> This happens because dbg_cpu_pm_notify() calls reset_ctrl_regs(), which
> can't access the debug registers as the debug module is powered down.
>
> Protect the call to reset_ctrl_regs() by an undefined instruction hook,
> like was done in commit 0d352e3d006c9589 ("ARM: hw_breakpoint: trap
> undef instruction exceptions in reset_ctrl_regs") for another caller.
I'd prefer a better solution to this (such as tracking whether the ETM
block is powered down). This feels very much like a hack than a good
solution.
Also, the undefined instruction hook was not supposed to be used in this
way - certainly *not* dynamically like this. While the lookup of the
undef handler is done in a safe atomic way, calling the resulting
function is outside of the locks.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists