Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 17 Jan 2018 12:25:49 +0000 | From | Dave Martin <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] arm64: Run enable method for errata work arounds on late CPUs |
| |
On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 10:05:56AM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > When a CPU is brought up after we have finalised the system > wide capabilities (i.e, features and errata), we make sure the > new CPU doesn't need a new errata work around which has not been > detected already. However we don't run enable() method on the new > CPU for the errata work arounds already detected. This could > cause the new CPU running without potential work arounds. > It is upto the "enable()" method to decide if this CPU should > do something about the errata. > > Fixes: commit 6a6efbb45b7d95c84 ("arm64: Verify CPU errata work arounds on hotplugged CPU") > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> > Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c | 9 ++++++--- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c > index 90a9e465339c..54e41dfe41f6 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c > @@ -373,15 +373,18 @@ void verify_local_cpu_errata_workarounds(void) > { > const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps = arm64_errata; > > - for (; caps->matches; caps++) > - if (!cpus_have_cap(caps->capability) && > - caps->matches(caps, SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU)) { > + for (; caps->matches; caps++) { > + if (cpus_have_cap(caps->capability)) { > + if (caps->enable) > + caps->enable((void *)caps);
Do we really need this cast?
Can enable() fail, or do we already guarantee that it succeeds (by having detected the cap in the first place)?
> + } else if (caps->matches(caps, SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU)) {
[...]
Cheers ---Dave
| |