linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irq/gic-its: gicv4: set VPENDING table as inner-shareable

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]

Date:   Mon, 30 Mar 2020 08:39:57 +0800
From:   Heyi Guo <guoheyi@...wei.com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <wanghaibin.wang@...wei.com>,
        "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq/gic-its: gicv4: set VPENDING table as inner-shareable


On 2020/3/21 17:54, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Heyi,
>
> On 2020-02-24 02:22, Heyi Guo wrote:
>> Hi Marc,
>>
>> On 2019/12/2 2:04, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Nov 2019 15:38:49 +0800
>>> Heyi Guo <guoheyi@...wei.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no special reason to set virtual LPI pending table as
>>>> non-shareable. If we choose to hard code the shareability without
>>>> probing, inner-shareable will be a better choice, for all the other
>>>> ITS/GICR tables prefer to be inner-shareable.
>>> One of the issues is that we have strictly no idea what the caches are
>>> Inner Shareable with (I've been asking for such clarification for years
>>> without getting anywhere). You can have as many disconnected inner
>>> shareable domains as you want!
>>>
>>> I suspect that in the grand scheme of things, the redistributors
>>> ought to be in the same inner shareable domain, and that with a bit of
>>> luck, the CPUs are there as well. Still, that's a massive guess.
>>>
>>>> What's more, on Hisilicon hip08 it will trigger some kind of bus
>>>> warning when mixing use of different shareabilities.
>>> Do you have more information about what the bus is complaining about?
>>> Is that because the CPUs have these pages mapped as inner shareable?
>>>
>>> I'll give it a go on D05 (HIP07) to find out what changes there.
>>
>> How's your go on D05? Did you see any issues?
>
> Sorry it took so long. I've given it a go on my D05, and didn't notice
> anything bad (or rather, nothing worse than usual, since GICv4 on this
> machine is pretty... funky).
>
> I've now take this into the 5.7 queue.


Thanks,

Heyi


>
> Thanks,
>
>          M.