[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210209115533.GE1435@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:55:33 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
Evgenii Stepanov <eugenis@...gle.com>,
Branislav Rankov <Branislav.Rankov@....com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 6/7] arm64: mte: Save/Restore TFSR_EL1 during suspend
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 04:56:16PM +0000, Vincenzo Frascino wrote:
> When MTE async mode is enabled TFSR_EL1 contains the accumulative
> asynchronous tag check faults for EL1 and EL0.
>
> During the suspend/resume operations the firmware might perform some
> operations that could change the state of the register resulting in
> a spurious tag check fault report.
>
> Save/restore the state of the TFSR_EL1 register during the
> suspend/resume operations to prevent this to happen.
Do we need a similar fix for TFSRE0_EL1? We get away with this if
suspend is only entered on the idle (kernel) thread but I recall we
could also enter suspend on behalf of a user process (I may be wrong
though).
If that's the case, it would make more sense to store the TFSR* regs in
the thread_struct alongside sctlr_tcf0. If we did that, we'd not need
the per-cpu mte_suspend_tfsr_el1 variable.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists