linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Flush GICR caching for a cross node collection move of an irq

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: <a2754c68-0a6b-e23d-1ed7-693ce4f7f89c@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Dec 2017 09:26:10 +0000
From:   Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To:     Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, jason@...edaemon.net, catalin.marinas@....com,
        will.deacon@....com, jnair@...iumnetworks.com,
        Robert.Richter@...ium.com, Jan.Glauber@...ium.com,
        gklkml16@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3-its: Flush GICR caching for a cross node
 collection move of an irq

On 20/12/17 09:15, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> When an interrupt is moved, it is possible that an implementation that
> supports caching might still have cached data for a previous
> (no longer valid) mapping of the interrupt. In particular, in a distributed
> GIC implementation like multi-socket SoC platfroms. Hence it is necessary
> to flush cached entries after cross node collection migration.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ganapatrao Kulkarni <ganapatrao.kulkarni@...ium.com>
> ---
>  drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> index 4039e64..ea849a1 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c
> @@ -1119,6 +1119,12 @@ static int its_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
>  	if (cpu != its_dev->event_map.col_map[id]) {
>  		target_col = &its_dev->its->collections[cpu];
>  		its_send_movi(its_dev, target_col, id);
> +		/* Issue INV for cross node collection move on
> +		 * multi socket systems.
> +		 */
> +		if (cpu_to_node(cpu) !=
> +				cpu_to_node(its_dev->event_map.col_map[id]))
> +			its_send_inv(its_dev, id);
>  		its_dev->event_map.col_map[id] = cpu;
>  		irq_data_update_effective_affinity(d, cpumask_of(cpu));
>  	}
> 

The MOVI command doesn't have any such requirement (it only mandates
synchronization), and doesn't say anything about distributed vs monolithic.

What am I missing?

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...