All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/9] irqchip/gic-v2, v3: Implement irq_chip->irq_retrigger()
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:23:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200824102317.1038259-2-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200824102317.1038259-1-maz@kernel.org>

From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>

While digging around IRQCHIP_EOI_IF_HANDLED and irq/resend.c, it has come
to my attention that the IRQ resend situation seems a bit precarious for
the GIC(s).

When marking an IRQ with IRQS_PENDING, handle_fasteoi_irq() will bail out
and issue an irq_eoi(). Should the IRQ in question be re-enabled,
check_irq_resend() will trigger a SW resend, which will go through the flow
handler again and issue *another* irq_eoi() on the *same* IRQ
activation. This is something the GIC spec clearly describes as a bad idea:
any EOI must match a previous ACK.

Implement irq_chip.irq_retrigger() for the GIC chips by setting the GIC
pending bit of the relevant IRQ. After being called by check_irq_resend(),
this will eventually trigger a *new* interrupt which we will handle as usual.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200730170321.31228-2-valentin.schneider@arm.com
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 7 +++++++
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c    | 6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
index 324f280ff606..b507bc7c5cda 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
@@ -1207,6 +1207,11 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
 #define gic_smp_init()		do { } while(0)
 #endif
 
+static int gic_retrigger(struct irq_data *data)
+{
+	return !gic_irq_set_irqchip_state(data, IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, true);
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_PM
 static int gic_cpu_pm_notifier(struct notifier_block *self,
 			       unsigned long cmd, void *v)
@@ -1242,6 +1247,7 @@ static struct irq_chip gic_chip = {
 	.irq_eoi		= gic_eoi_irq,
 	.irq_set_type		= gic_set_type,
 	.irq_set_affinity	= gic_set_affinity,
+	.irq_retrigger          = gic_retrigger,
 	.irq_get_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_get_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_set_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_nmi_setup		= gic_irq_nmi_setup,
@@ -1258,6 +1264,7 @@ static struct irq_chip gic_eoimode1_chip = {
 	.irq_eoi		= gic_eoimode1_eoi_irq,
 	.irq_set_type		= gic_set_type,
 	.irq_set_affinity	= gic_set_affinity,
+	.irq_retrigger          = gic_retrigger,
 	.irq_get_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_get_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_set_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_vcpu_affinity	= gic_irq_set_vcpu_affinity,
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index a27ba2cc1dce..e92ee2b6d7a5 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
@@ -347,6 +347,11 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
 }
 #endif
 
+static int gic_retrigger(struct irq_data *data)
+{
+	return !gic_irq_set_irqchip_state(data, IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, true);
+}
+
 static void __exception_irq_entry gic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	u32 irqstat, irqnr;
@@ -417,6 +422,7 @@ static const struct irq_chip gic_chip = {
 	.irq_unmask		= gic_unmask_irq,
 	.irq_eoi		= gic_eoi_irq,
 	.irq_set_type		= gic_set_type,
+	.irq_retrigger          = gic_retrigger,
 	.irq_get_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_get_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_set_irqchip_state,
 	.flags			= IRQCHIP_SET_TYPE_MASKED |
-- 
2.27.0


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
	Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/9] irqchip/gic-v2, v3: Implement irq_chip->irq_retrigger()
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2020 11:23:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200824102317.1038259-2-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200824102317.1038259-1-maz@kernel.org>

From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>

While digging around IRQCHIP_EOI_IF_HANDLED and irq/resend.c, it has come
to my attention that the IRQ resend situation seems a bit precarious for
the GIC(s).

When marking an IRQ with IRQS_PENDING, handle_fasteoi_irq() will bail out
and issue an irq_eoi(). Should the IRQ in question be re-enabled,
check_irq_resend() will trigger a SW resend, which will go through the flow
handler again and issue *another* irq_eoi() on the *same* IRQ
activation. This is something the GIC spec clearly describes as a bad idea:
any EOI must match a previous ACK.

Implement irq_chip.irq_retrigger() for the GIC chips by setting the GIC
pending bit of the relevant IRQ. After being called by check_irq_resend(),
this will eventually trigger a *new* interrupt which we will handle as usual.

Signed-off-by: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200730170321.31228-2-valentin.schneider@arm.com
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 7 +++++++
 drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c    | 6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
index 324f280ff606..b507bc7c5cda 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c
@@ -1207,6 +1207,11 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
 #define gic_smp_init()		do { } while(0)
 #endif
 
+static int gic_retrigger(struct irq_data *data)
+{
+	return !gic_irq_set_irqchip_state(data, IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, true);
+}
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_PM
 static int gic_cpu_pm_notifier(struct notifier_block *self,
 			       unsigned long cmd, void *v)
@@ -1242,6 +1247,7 @@ static struct irq_chip gic_chip = {
 	.irq_eoi		= gic_eoi_irq,
 	.irq_set_type		= gic_set_type,
 	.irq_set_affinity	= gic_set_affinity,
+	.irq_retrigger          = gic_retrigger,
 	.irq_get_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_get_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_set_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_nmi_setup		= gic_irq_nmi_setup,
@@ -1258,6 +1264,7 @@ static struct irq_chip gic_eoimode1_chip = {
 	.irq_eoi		= gic_eoimode1_eoi_irq,
 	.irq_set_type		= gic_set_type,
 	.irq_set_affinity	= gic_set_affinity,
+	.irq_retrigger          = gic_retrigger,
 	.irq_get_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_get_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_set_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_vcpu_affinity	= gic_irq_set_vcpu_affinity,
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index a27ba2cc1dce..e92ee2b6d7a5 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
@@ -347,6 +347,11 @@ static int gic_set_affinity(struct irq_data *d, const struct cpumask *mask_val,
 }
 #endif
 
+static int gic_retrigger(struct irq_data *data)
+{
+	return !gic_irq_set_irqchip_state(data, IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING, true);
+}
+
 static void __exception_irq_entry gic_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	u32 irqstat, irqnr;
@@ -417,6 +422,7 @@ static const struct irq_chip gic_chip = {
 	.irq_unmask		= gic_unmask_irq,
 	.irq_eoi		= gic_eoi_irq,
 	.irq_set_type		= gic_set_type,
+	.irq_retrigger          = gic_retrigger,
 	.irq_get_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_get_irqchip_state,
 	.irq_set_irqchip_state	= gic_irq_set_irqchip_state,
 	.flags			= IRQCHIP_SET_TYPE_MASKED |
-- 
2.27.0


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-24 10:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-24 10:23 [PATCH 0/9] irqchip/gic: generalize use of HW-based retriggering Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2020-08-24 10:23   ` [PATCH 1/9] irqchip/gic-v2, v3: Implement irq_chip->irq_retrigger() Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 2/9] irqchip/git-v3-its: Implement irq_retrigger callback for device-triggered LPIs Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 3/9] PCI/MSI: Provide default retrigger callback Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-25 19:44   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-08-25 19:44     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 4/9] platform-msi: " Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 5/9] fsl-msi: " Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-26 11:16   ` Valentin Schneider
2020-08-26 11:16     ` Valentin Schneider
2020-08-26 16:37     ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-26 16:37       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-26 17:52       ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-26 17:52         ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 6/9] irqchip/mbigen: Use hierarchy retrigger helper Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 7/9] irqchip/mvebu-icu: " Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 8/9] irqchip/mvebu-sei: " Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23 ` [PATCH 9/9] irqchip/gic-v2, v3: Prevent SW resends entirely Marc Zyngier
2020-08-24 10:23   ` Marc Zyngier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200824102317.1038259-2-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=gregory.clement@bootlin.com \
    --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \
    --cc=laurentiu.tudor@nxp.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.