linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/14] ARM: ARMv7M: Enlarge vector table to 256 entries

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

Message-ID: <CALszF6DyVqaE6DLKSQHeuYWgSChzhEtCbmOsbjoTkvipquBivw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 19 Feb 2015 17:13:32 +0100
From:	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>
To:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Antti Palosaari <crope@....fi>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Nikolay Borisov <Nikolay.Borisov@....com>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] ARM: ARMv7M: Enlarge vector table to 256 entries

Hi Rob,

2015-02-15 23:42 GMT+01:00 Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:42 AM, Maxime Coquelin
> <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com> wrote:
>> Hi Geert,
>>
>> 2015-02-12 21:34 GMT+01:00 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>:
>>> On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Maxime Coquelin
>>> <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com> wrote:
>>>> From Cortex-M4 and M7 reference manuals, the nvic supports up to 240
>>>> interrupts. So the number of entries in vectors table is 256.
>>>>
>>>> This patch adds the missing entries, and change the alignement, so that
>>>> vector_table remains naturally aligned.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't this depend on ARCH_STM32, or some other M4 or M7 specific
>>> Kconfig option, to avoid wasting the space on other CPUs?
>>
>> Actually, the STM32F429 has 90 interrupts, so it would need 106
>> entries in the vector table.
>> The maximum of supported interrupts is not only for Cortex-M4 and M7,
>> this is also true for Cortex-M3.
>>
>> I see two possibilities:
>>  1 - We declare the vector table for the maximum supported number of
>> IRQs, as this patch does.
>>         - Pro: it will be functionnal with all Cortex-M MCUs
>>         - Con: Waste of less than 1KB for memory
>
> The waste depends on the alignment size as well and could be up to
> almost 2KB worst case. It varies depending on the padding. We should
> try to place it so it always aligned and the wasted space is
> minimized.

Sorry, I just notice I didn't replied to all. That was my question:

Do you mean by forcing its location in the arch/arm/kernel/vmlinux.lds.S file?

Regards,
Maxime

>
> Rob
>
>>  2 - We introduce a config flag that provides the number of interrupts
>>         - Pro: No more memory waste
>>         - Con: Need to declare a per MCU model config flag.
>>
>> Then, regarding the natural alignment, is there a way to ensure it
>> depending on the value of a config flag?
>> Or we should keep it at the maximum value possible?
>>
>> Any feedback will be appreciated, especially from Uwe who maintains
>> the efm32 machine.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Maxime
--
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/