[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170116172927.GI5908@leverpostej>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 17:29:28 +0000
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: fu.wei@...aro.org
Cc: rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, marc.zyngier@....com,
lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, sudeep.holla@....com,
hanjun.guo@...aro.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, rruigrok@...eaurora.org,
harba@...eaurora.org, cov@...eaurora.org, timur@...eaurora.org,
graeme.gregory@...aro.org, al.stone@...aro.org, jcm@...hat.com,
wei@...hat.com, arnd@...db.de, catalin.marinas@....com,
will.deacon@....com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com,
leo.duran@....com, wim@...ana.be, linux@...ck-us.net,
linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, tn@...ihalf.com,
christoffer.dall@...aro.org, julien.grall@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 05/15] clocksource/drivers/arm_arch_timer: rework PPI
determination
On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 02:45:53PM +0800, fu.wei@...aro.org wrote:
[...]
> - if (is_hyp_mode_available() || !arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI]) {
> - bool has_ppi;
> + if (is_hyp_mode_available() && is_kernel_in_hyp_mode())
> + return ARCH_TIMER_HYP_PPI;
>
> - if (is_kernel_in_hyp_mode()) {
> - arch_timer_uses_ppi = ARCH_TIMER_HYP_PPI;
> - has_ppi = !!arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_HYP_PPI];
> - } else {
> - arch_timer_uses_ppi = ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_SECURE_PPI;
> - has_ppi = (!!arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_SECURE_PPI] ||
> - !!arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI]);
> - }
> + if (arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI])
> + return ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI;
>
> - if (!has_ppi) {
> - pr_warn("No interrupt available, giving up\n");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> - }
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64))
> + return ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI;
> +
> + return ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_SECURE_PPI;
For a 32-bit platform booted at hyp (with a virt PPI available), the new
logic will select ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI. I beleive that will break KVM.
I think the logic should be:
if (is_kernel_in_hyp_mode())
return ARCH_TIMER_HYP_PPI;
if (!is_hyp_mode_available() &&
arch_timer_ppi[ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI])
return ARCH_TIMER_VIRT_PPI;
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64))
return ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_NONSECURE_PPI;
return ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_SECURE_PPI;
Please use that instead (keeping the comment you retained).
> +static int __init arch_timer_init(void)
> +{
> + int ret;
>
> ret = arch_timer_register();
> if (ret)
> @@ -904,6 +906,13 @@ static int __init arch_timer_of_init(struct device_node *np)
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM) &&
> of_property_read_bool(np, "arm,cpu-registers-not-fw-configured"))
> arch_timer_uses_ppi = ARCH_TIMER_PHYS_SECURE_PPI;
> + else
> + arch_timer_uses_ppi = arch_timer_select_ppi();
> +
> + if (!arch_timer_ppi[arch_timer_uses_ppi]) {
> + pr_err("No interrupt available, giving up\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
>
> /* On some systems, the counter stops ticking when in suspend. */
> arch_counter_suspend_stop = of_property_read_bool(np,
> @@ -1049,6 +1058,12 @@ static int __init arch_timer_acpi_init(struct acpi_table_header *table)
> /* Get the frequency from CNTFRQ */
> arch_timer_detect_rate(NULL, NULL);
>
> + arch_timer_uses_ppi = arch_timer_select_ppi();
> + if (!arch_timer_ppi[arch_timer_uses_ppi]) {
> + pr_err("No interrupt available, giving up\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
I see that we have to duplicate this so we can special-case the
DT-specific behaviour, so that's fine by me.
If you can fix the arch_timer_select_ppi() logic as above, this should
be fine.
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists