linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/9] Fix Allwinner D1 boot regression

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

Message-ID: <87h6blnaf1.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 16:11:14 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>, Emil Renner Berthing
 <emil.renner.berthing@...onical.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt
 <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Daniel Lezcano
 <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/9] Fix Allwinner D1 boot regression

On Thu, Aug 15 2024 at 08:32, Samuel Holland wrote:
> On 2024-08-15 8:16 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Yes. So the riscv timer is not working on this thing or it stops
>> somehow.
>
> That's correct. With the (firmware) devicetree that Emil is using, the OpenSBI
> firmware does not have a timer device, so it does not expose the (optional[1])
> SBI time extension, and sbi_set_timer() does nothing.

Sigh. Does RISCV really have to repeat all mistakes which have been made
by x86, ARM and others before? It's known for decades that the kernel
relies on a working timer...

> I wrote a patch (not submitted) to skip registering riscv_clock_event when the
> SBI time extension is unavailable, but this doesn't fully solve the issue
> either, because then we have no clockevent at all when
> check_unaligned_access_all_cpus() is called.

check_unaligned_access_all_cpus() is irrelevant.

> How early in the boot process are we "required" to have a functional clockevent?
> Do we need to refactor check_unaligned_access_all_cpus() so it works on systems
> where the only clockevent is provided by a platform device?

Right after init/main::late_time_init() everything can depend on a
working timer and on jiffies increasing.

I'm actually surprised that the boot process gets that far. That's just
by pure luck, really.

Thanks,

        tglx