linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] riscv,aplic: support for hart indexes

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:
 <VI1PR09MB2333013AB5FF1C5FBC14312394142@VI1PR09MB2333.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2025 15:07:01 +0000
From: Vladimir Kondratiev <Vladimir.Kondratiev@...ileye.com>
To: Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Paul Walmsley
	<paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou
	<aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
	<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	"linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] riscv,aplic: support for hart indexes

>Here's the text from "4.8 Interrupt delivery directly by the APLIC" of
>the AIA specification:

>"When an interrupt domain is in direct delivery mode (domaincfg.DM = 0),
>interrupts are delivered from the APLIC to harts by a unique signal to each
>hart, usually a dedicated wire. In this case, the domain’s memory-mapped
>control region contains at the end an array of interrupt delivery control (IDC)
>structures, one IDC structure per potential hart index. The first IDC structure
>is for the domain’s hart with index 0; the second is for the hart with
>index 1; etc."

>The AIA spec clearly says that for APLIC in direct mode requires
>sequential "HART index" starting from 0 so that IDC structures can
>be located using the APLIC "HART index".

Hi Anup,
I am reading same text but interpreting it differently. I understand it this way:
for every hart, there's "hart index" that may be arbitrary (unique in domain)
14-bit  integer. Then IDC should be accessed using this index. I don't see
anything that prohibits sparse array of IDCs.

To support this, #4.5 "Memory-mapped control region for an interrupt domain" says:

The array of IDC structures may include some for potential hart index numbers that are not actual
hart index numbers in the domain. For example, the first IDC structure is always for hart index 0,
but 0 is not necessarily a valid index number for any hart in the domain. For each IDC structure in
the array that does not correspond to a valid hart index number in the domain, the IDC structure’s
registers may (or may not) be all read-only zeros.

This suggests 0 may be not a valid hart index, so clearly some gaps are allowed.

Thanks, Vladimir.