linux-kernel - [PATCH 1/2] irqchip/sifive-plic: Fix duplicate mask/unmask for claim/complete

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20211011132431.2792797-1-guoren@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 11 Oct 2021 21:24:30 +0800
From:   guoren@...nel.org
To:     guoren@...nel.org, anup@...infault.org, atish.patra@....com,
        maz@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, palmer@...belt.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] irqchip/sifive-plic: Fix duplicate mask/unmask for claim/complete

From: Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>

PLIC only has enable-registers not mask/unmask registers. Mixing
mask/unmask with irq_eoi is wrong, because readl(claim) could mask
irq by hardware. We only need mask/unmask to fixup the hardware
which couldn't claim + mask correctly.

If hardware supports claim + mask, it would cause unnecessary
mask/umak operations.

Signed-off-by: Guo Ren <guoren@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
index cf74cfa82045..0fa46912f452 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sifive-plic.c
@@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ struct plic_priv {
 	struct cpumask lmask;
 	struct irq_domain *irqdomain;
 	void __iomem *regs;
+	bool claim_mask_support;
 };
 
 struct plic_handler {
@@ -111,7 +112,7 @@ static inline void plic_irq_toggle(const struct cpumask *mask,
 	}
 }
 
-static void plic_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
+static void plic_irq_enable(struct irq_data *d)
 {
 	struct cpumask amask;
 	unsigned int cpu;
@@ -125,7 +126,7 @@ static void plic_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)
 	plic_irq_toggle(cpumask_of(cpu), d, 1);
 }
 
-static void plic_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d)
+static void plic_irq_disable(struct irq_data *d)
 {
 	struct plic_priv *priv = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
 
@@ -168,8 +169,8 @@ static void plic_irq_eoi(struct irq_data *d)
 
 static struct irq_chip plic_chip = {
 	.name		= "SiFive PLIC",
-	.irq_mask	= plic_irq_mask,
-	.irq_unmask	= plic_irq_unmask,
+	.irq_enable	= plic_irq_enable,
+	.irq_disable	= plic_irq_disable,
 	.irq_eoi	= plic_irq_eoi,
 #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
 	.irq_set_affinity = plic_set_affinity,
@@ -181,6 +182,11 @@ static int plic_irqdomain_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq,
 {
 	struct plic_priv *priv = d->host_data;
 
+	if (!priv->claim_mask_support) {
+		plic_chip.irq_mask	= plic_irq_disable;
+		plic_chip.irq_unmask	= plic_irq_enable;
+	}
+
 	irq_domain_set_info(d, irq, hwirq, &plic_chip, d->host_data,
 			    handle_fasteoi_irq, NULL, NULL);
 	irq_set_noprobe(irq);
@@ -298,6 +304,8 @@ static int __init plic_init(struct device_node *node,
 	if (WARN_ON(!nr_contexts))
 		goto out_iounmap;
 
+	priv->claim_mask_support = of_property_read_bool(node, "claim-mask-support");
+
 	error = -ENOMEM;
 	priv->irqdomain = irq_domain_add_linear(node, nr_irqs + 1,
 			&plic_irqdomain_ops, priv);
-- 
2.25.1