| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87pmkz94bc.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 18:39:51 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] irqchip/exiu: Fix acknowledgment of edge triggered interrupts
On Fri, 29 Apr 2022 17:53:14 +0100,
Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> Currently the EXIU uses the fasteoi interrupt flow that is configured by
> it's parent (irq-gic-v3.c). With this flow the only chance to clear the
> interrupt request happens during .irq_eoi() and (obviously) this happens
> after the interrupt handler has run. EXIU requires edge triggered
> interrupts to be acked prior to interrupt handling. Without this we
> risk incorrect interrupt dismissal when a new interrupt is delivered
> after the handler reads and acknowledges the peripheral but before the
> irq_eoi() takes place.
>
> Fix this by clearing the interrupt request from .irq_ack() if we are
> configured for edge triggered interrupts. This requires adopting the
> fasteoi-ack flow instead of the fasteoi to ensure the ack gets called.
>
> These changes have been tested using the power button on a
> Developerbox/SC2A11 combined with some hackery in gpio-keys so I can
> play with the different trigger mode (and an mdelay(500) so I can
> can check what happens on a double click in both modes.
>
> Fixes: 706cffc1b912 ("irqchip/exiu: Add support for Socionext Synquacer EXIU controller")
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> Changes in v2:
>
> * Switch to dynamic selection of handle_fasteoi_irq and
> handle_fasteoi_ack_irq and reintroduce exiu_irq_eoi() since we need
> that for level triggered interrupts (Ard B).
> * Above changes mean we are no longer using sun6i NMI code as a
> template to tidy up the description accordingly.
>
> arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms | 1 +
> drivers/irqchip/irq-sni-exiu.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> index 30b123cde02c..aaeaf57c8222 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig.platforms
> @@ -253,6 +253,7 @@ config ARCH_INTEL_SOCFPGA
>
> config ARCH_SYNQUACER
> bool "Socionext SynQuacer SoC Family"
> + select IRQ_FASTEOI_HIERARCHY_HANDLERS
>
> config ARCH_TEGRA
> bool "NVIDIA Tegra SoC Family"
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sni-exiu.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sni-exiu.c
> index abd011fcecf4..651a82dead01 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-sni-exiu.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-sni-exiu.c
> @@ -37,11 +37,20 @@ struct exiu_irq_data {
> u32 spi_base;
> };
>
> -static void exiu_irq_eoi(struct irq_data *d)
> +static void exiu_irq_ack(struct irq_data *d)
> {
> struct exiu_irq_data *data = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
>
> writel(BIT(d->hwirq), data->base + EIREQCLR);
> +}
> +
> +static void exiu_irq_eoi(struct irq_data *d)
> +{
> + struct exiu_irq_data *data = irq_data_get_irq_chip_data(d);
> + u32 edge_triggered = readl_relaxed(data->base + EIEDG);
I expect this to be pretty expensive. Why not directly check the state
flags with irqd_is_level_type()?
> +
> + if (!(edge_triggered & BIT(d->hwirq)))
> + writel(BIT(d->hwirq), data->base + EIREQCLR);
Is this write even needed for a level interrupt? Or does the register
always behave as a latch irrespective of the trigger?
> irq_chip_eoi_parent(d);
> }
>
> @@ -91,10 +100,13 @@ static int exiu_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
> writel_relaxed(val, data->base + EILVL);
>
> val = readl_relaxed(data->base + EIEDG);
> - if (type == IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW || type == IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)
> + if (type == IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW || type == IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH) {
> val &= ~BIT(d->hwirq);
> - else
> + irq_set_handler_locked(d, handle_fasteoi_irq);
> + } else {
> val |= BIT(d->hwirq);
> + irq_set_handler_locked(d, handle_fasteoi_ack_irq);
> + }
> writel_relaxed(val, data->base + EIEDG);
>
> writel_relaxed(BIT(d->hwirq), data->base + EIREQCLR);
> @@ -104,6 +116,7 @@ static int exiu_irq_set_type(struct irq_data *d, unsigned int type)
>
> static struct irq_chip exiu_irq_chip = {
> .name = "EXIU",
> + .irq_ack = exiu_irq_ack,
> .irq_eoi = exiu_irq_eoi,
> .irq_enable = exiu_irq_enable,
> .irq_mask = exiu_irq_mask,
> @@ -148,6 +161,8 @@ static int exiu_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *dom, unsigned int virq,
> struct irq_fwspec parent_fwspec;
> struct exiu_irq_data *info = dom->host_data;
> irq_hw_number_t hwirq;
> + int i, ret;
> + u32 edge_triggered;
>
> parent_fwspec = *fwspec;
> if (is_of_node(dom->parent->fwnode)) {
> @@ -165,7 +180,17 @@ static int exiu_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *dom, unsigned int virq,
> irq_domain_set_hwirq_and_chip(dom, virq, hwirq, &exiu_irq_chip, info);
>
> parent_fwspec.fwnode = dom->parent->fwnode;
> - return irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(dom, virq, nr_irqs, &parent_fwspec);
> + ret = irq_domain_alloc_irqs_parent(dom, virq, nr_irqs, &parent_fwspec);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + edge_triggered = readl_relaxed(info->base + EIEDG);
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++)
> + irq_set_handler(virq + i, edge_triggered & BIT(i) ?
> + handle_fasteoi_ack_irq :
> + handle_fasteoi_irq);
> +
> + return 0;
Why do you need this at allocation time? I would have expected the
trigger configuration to be enough.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists