lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 04/26] arm64: alternative: Apply alternatives early in boot process
    From
    Date
    On 25/05/18 10:49, Julien Thierry wrote:
    > From: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
    >
    > Currently alternatives are applied very late in the boot process (and
    > a long time after we enable scheduling). Some alternative sequences,
    > such as those that alter the way CPU context is stored, must be applied
    > much earlier in the boot sequence.
    >
    > Introduce apply_boot_alternatives() to allow some alternatives to be
    > applied immediately after we detect the CPU features of the boot CPU.
    >
    > Signed-off-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@linaro.org>
    > [julien.thierry@arm.com: rename to fit new cpufeature framework better,
    > apply BOOT_SCOPE feature early in boot]
    > Signed-off-by: Julien Thierry <julien.thierry@arm.com>
    > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
    > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
    > Cc: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
    > Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
    > ---
    > arch/arm64/include/asm/alternative.h | 3 +--
    > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 2 ++
    > arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
    > arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 5 +++++
    > arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c | 7 +++++++
    > 5 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
    >

    ...

    >
    > +unsigned long boot_capabilities;
    > +
    > /*
    > * Flag to indicate if we have computed the system wide
    > * capabilities based on the boot time active CPUs. This
    > @@ -1370,6 +1372,9 @@ static void __update_cpu_capabilities(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps,
    > if (!cpus_have_cap(caps->capability) && caps->desc)
    > pr_info("%s %s\n", info, caps->desc);
    > cpus_set_cap(caps->capability);
    > +
    > + if (scope_mask & SCOPE_BOOT_CPU)
    > + __set_bit(caps->capability, &boot_capabilities);

    Julien

    I think this check is problematic. The scope_mask passed on by the boot CPU
    is (SCOPE_BOOT_CPU | SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU) to cover both BOOT CPU capabilities *and*
    CPU local capabilites on the boot CPU. So, you might apply the alternatives for
    a "local" CPU erratum, which is not intended. You may change the above check to :

    if (caps->type & SCOPE_BOOT_CPU)

    to make sure you check the "capability" has the SCOPE_BOOT_CPU set.

    Suzuki

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2018-05-25 12:01    [W:4.504 / U:0.176 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site