linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] arm64: amd-seattle: Adding device tree for AMD Seattle platform

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <D09577B0.9B9B%suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 2014 16:25:55 +0000
From:	"Suthikulpanit, Suravee" <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>
To:	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>
CC:	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
	"Schopp, Joel" <Joel.Schopp@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] arm64: amd-seattle: Adding device tree for AMD
 Seattle platform



On 11/21/14, 21:48, "Marc Zyngier" <marc.zyngier@....com> wrote:

>On 21/11/14 14:40, Suthikulpanit, Suravee wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/21/14, 19:57, "Marc Zyngier" <marc.zyngier@....com> wrote:
>> 
>>>> +	gic: interrupt-controller@...01000 {
>>>> +		compatible = "arm,gic-400", "arm,cortex-a15-gic";
>>>> +		interrupt-controller;
>>>> +		#interrupt-cells = <3>;
>>>> +		#address-cells = <2>;
>>>> +		#size-cells = <2>;
>>>> +		reg = <0x0 0xe1110000 0 0x1000>,
>>>> +		      <0x0 0xe112f000 0 0x2000>,
>>>> +		      <0x0 0xe1140000 0 0x10000>,
>>>> +		      <0x0 0xe1160000 0 0x10000>;
>>>> +		interrupts = <1 8 0xf04>;
>>>
>>> Are you sure about this one? ARM systems usually have this wired on
>>>PPI9
>>> (interrupt 25)...
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> 	M.
>> 
>> I think you might be right. GIC-400 TRM says that this is should be
>> 25, and used for virtual maintenance interrupts. How can I verify
>> this in Linux? KVM?
>
>KVM is one way, but you'll never see the interrupt firing (we kill the
>interrupt while in HYP, before the kernel gets a chance to see it).
>
>If you effectively have GIC400 on this system, then I know for sure this
>is interrupt 25.

I¹ll make the change. Thanks for clarification.

Suravee
>
>Thanks,
>
>	M.
>-- 
>Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

--
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/