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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 11:03:35 +0200 From: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com> To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>, Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>, Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>, Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: tegra: cpuidle: implement cpuidle_state.enter_freeze() On 17 April 2015 at 16:08, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 03:37:19PM +0100, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: > > [...] > >> >> I don't know what FIQs are. :-) >> > >> > In short, fast IRQs, it is a separate IRQ line handled as a separate >> > exception source with some private (banked) registers that minimize registers >> > saving/restoring. They are not identical to NMI on x86, since >> > their behaviour (handling) may be overriden by platforms and they >> > can be masked. >> > >> >> ->enter_freeze is entered with interrupts disabled on the local CPU. It is >> >> not supposed to re-enable them. That is, while in the ->enter_freeze callback >> >> routine, the CPU must not be interrupted aby anything other than NMI. >> > >> > It boils down to what FIQs handlers are allowed to do with tick frozen >> > and what they are (may be) currently used for. >> > >> > Russell has more insights on this than I do, in particular what FIQs are >> > currently used for on ARM and if we can leave them enabled safely with tick >> > frozen. >> >> But even if it's currently safe to leave them enabled, is there any >> reason for not disabling them? > > Ok, the point here is: either it is safe, and you leave them enabled, > or it is not and we must disable them *before* enter_freeze() is entered. > > Disabling them in the platform enter_freeze() hook does not make sense, > because this means we run with FIQs enabled with tick frozen, either > it is safe or it is not, it can't be both. I have been looking and asking around, and seems like we should actually leave FIQs enabled when the tick is frozen and only disable them within enter_freeze. My understanding is that FIQ handlers are extremely limited in what they can do, with the main use being NMI-like functionality. There are a handful of other FIQ handlers in mainline, but they don't call into any other kernel code and limit themselves to doing some basic I/O. The only reason why they should be disabled in enter_freeze is that the context of the CPU that is going to a lower power state could become corrupted if a FIQ gets fired during a save or restore operation. Regards, Tomeu > I would ask Russell opinion on this, before making any decision. > > Lorenzo > -- > 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/ -- 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