[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8735olbl8x.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 09:34:54 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Zhiyuan Dai <daizhiyuan@...tium.com.cn>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Fix EOImode semantics in git_cpu_sys_reg_init()
Hi Zhiuyan,
On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 09:01:31 +0100,
Zhiyuan Dai <daizhiyuan@...tium.com.cn> wrote:
>
> ICC_CTLR_EL1 is a 64-bit register.EOImode, bit [1] EOI mode
> for the current Security state.
>
> current code semantics is set ICC_CTLR_EL1 register to zero.
> This patch only set the EOImode Bit to zero.
>
> refs: See Arm IHI 0069G, page 12-229.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhiyuan Dai <daizhiyuan@...tium.com.cn>
> ---
> drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 9 +++++++--
> include/linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v3.h | 3 +--
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
> index fd4e9a3..96466fc0 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
> @@ -967,6 +967,7 @@ static void gic_cpu_sys_reg_init(void)
> u64 need_rss = MPIDR_RS(mpidr);
> bool group0;
> u32 pribits;
> + u32 val;
>
> /*
> * Need to check that the SRE bit has actually been set. If
> @@ -1009,12 +1010,16 @@ static void gic_cpu_sys_reg_init(void)
> */
> gic_write_bpr1(0);
>
> + val = gic_read_ctlr();
> +
> if (static_branch_likely(&supports_deactivate_key)) {
> /* EOI drops priority only (mode 1) */
> - gic_write_ctlr(ICC_CTLR_EL1_EOImode_drop);
> + val |= ICC_CTLR_EL1_EOImode;
> + gic_write_ctlr(val);
> } else {
> /* EOI deactivates interrupt too (mode 0) */
> - gic_write_ctlr(ICC_CTLR_EL1_EOImode_drop_dir);
> + val &= ~ICC_CTLR_EL1_EOImode;
> + gic_write_ctlr(val);
I really wonder why you would need a read-modify-write sequence. There
are no bits in ICC_CTLR_EL1 that we would want to preserve:
- PHME: if it is writable, we really want it to be 0, as we don't use
1:N distribution
- CBPR: We only use G1 interrupts, and we use ICC_BPR1_EL1 for
preemption, hence the value being 0
All the other fields (apart from EOImode, obviously) are read-only or
RES0, as per the architecture.
Can you explain what you are trying to achieve here?
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists