All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Jonathan.Zhang@cavium.com, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/20] arm64: cpufeature: Enable IESB on exception entry/return for firmware-first
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:14:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <59E78BEF.4060300@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171018164309.ecwsk7qjmkyevos4@armageddon.cambridge.arm.com>

Hi Catalin,

On 18/10/17 17:43, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:18:05PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> index b68f5e93baac..29df2a93688c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -989,6 +989,21 @@ config ARM64_RAS_EXTN
>>  	  and access the new registers if the system supports the extension.
>>  	  Platform RAS features may additionally depend on firmware support.
>>  
>> +config ARM64_IESB
>> +	bool "Enable Implicit Error Synchronization Barrier (IESB)"
>> +	default y
>> +	depends on ARM64_RAS_EXTN
>> +	help
>> +	  ARM v8.2 adds a feature to add implicit error synchronization
>> +	  barriers whenever the CPU enters or exits a particular exception
>> +	  level.
>> +
>> +	  On CPUs with this feature and the 'RAS Extensions' feature, we can
>> +	  use this to contain detected (but not yet reported) errors to the
>> +	  relevant exception level.
>> +
>> +	  The feature is detected at runtime, selecting this option will
>> +	  enable these implicit barriers if the CPU supports the feature.
>>  endmenu
> 
> What's the use-case for not having this option always enabled?

I don't think there is a strong reason. It ended up with a Kconfig entry just
because its a separate cpufeature entry. I will merge it with the ARM64_RAS_EXTN.

The only reason I can think to turn it off is if its implemented but expensive
on some system, and the EL3/Secure RAS firmware policy stuff doesn't care
whether RAS errors cross exception boundaries.


Thanks,

James

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 13/20] arm64: cpufeature: Enable IESB on exception entry/return for firmware-first
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 18:14:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <59E78BEF.4060300@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171018164309.ecwsk7qjmkyevos4@armageddon.cambridge.arm.com>

Hi Catalin,

On 18/10/17 17:43, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:18:05PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> index b68f5e93baac..29df2a93688c 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig
>> @@ -989,6 +989,21 @@ config ARM64_RAS_EXTN
>>  	  and access the new registers if the system supports the extension.
>>  	  Platform RAS features may additionally depend on firmware support.
>>  
>> +config ARM64_IESB
>> +	bool "Enable Implicit Error Synchronization Barrier (IESB)"
>> +	default y
>> +	depends on ARM64_RAS_EXTN
>> +	help
>> +	  ARM v8.2 adds a feature to add implicit error synchronization
>> +	  barriers whenever the CPU enters or exits a particular exception
>> +	  level.
>> +
>> +	  On CPUs with this feature and the 'RAS Extensions' feature, we can
>> +	  use this to contain detected (but not yet reported) errors to the
>> +	  relevant exception level.
>> +
>> +	  The feature is detected at runtime, selecting this option will
>> +	  enable these implicit barriers if the CPU supports the feature.
>>  endmenu
> 
> What's the use-case for not having this option always enabled?

I don't think there is a strong reason. It ended up with a Kconfig entry just
because its a separate cpufeature entry. I will merge it with the ARM64_RAS_EXTN.

The only reason I can think to turn it off is if its implemented but expensive
on some system, and the EL3/Secure RAS firmware policy stuff doesn't care
whether RAS errors cross exception boundaries.


Thanks,

James

  reply	other threads:[~2017-10-18 17:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-10-05 19:17 [PATCH v3 00/20] SError rework + RAS&IESB for firmware first support James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17 ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 01/20] arm64: explicitly mask all exceptions James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-11 16:30   ` Julien Thierry
2017-10-11 16:30     ` Julien Thierry
2017-10-12 12:26     ` James Morse
2017-10-12 12:26       ` James Morse
2017-10-18 14:23   ` Catalin Marinas
2017-10-18 14:23     ` Catalin Marinas
2017-10-18 14:25     ` Catalin Marinas
2017-10-18 14:25       ` Catalin Marinas
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 02/20] arm64: introduce an order for exceptions James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-11 17:11   ` Julien Thierry
2017-10-11 17:11     ` Julien Thierry
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 03/20] arm64: Move the async/fiq helpers to explicitly set process context flags James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 04/20] arm64: Mask all exceptions during kernel_exit James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 05/20] arm64: entry.S: Remove disable_dbg James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 06/20] arm64: entry.S: convert el1_sync James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17 ` [PATCH v3 07/20] arm64: entry.S convert el0_sync James Morse
2017-10-05 19:17   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 08/20] arm64: entry.S: convert elX_irq James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-11 17:13   ` Julien Thierry
2017-10-11 17:13     ` Julien Thierry
2017-10-12 12:26     ` James Morse
2017-10-12 12:26       ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 09/20] KVM: arm/arm64: mask/unmask daif around VHE guests James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-11  9:01   ` Marc Zyngier
2017-10-11  9:01     ` Marc Zyngier
2017-10-11 15:40     ` James Morse
2017-10-11 15:40       ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 10/20] arm64: entry.S: move SError handling into a C function for future expansion James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 11/20] arm64: cpufeature: Detect CPU RAS Extentions James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 12/20] arm64: kernel: Survive corrected RAS errors notified by SError James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 13/20] arm64: cpufeature: Enable IESB on exception entry/return for firmware-first James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-18 16:43   ` Catalin Marinas
2017-10-18 16:43     ` Catalin Marinas
2017-10-18 17:14     ` James Morse [this message]
2017-10-18 17:14       ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 14/20] arm64: kernel: Prepare for a DISR user James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 15/20] KVM: arm64: Set an impdef ESR for Virtual-SError using VSESR_EL2 James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-13  9:25   ` gengdongjiu
2017-10-13  9:25     ` gengdongjiu
2017-10-13 16:53     ` James Morse
2017-10-13 16:53       ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 16/20] KVM: arm64: Save/Restore guest DISR_EL1 James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 17/20] KVM: arm64: Save ESR_EL2 on guest SError James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 18/20] KVM: arm64: Handle RAS SErrors from EL1 on guest exit James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 19/20] KVM: arm64: Handle RAS SErrors from EL2 " James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-11 10:37   ` Marc Zyngier
2017-10-11 10:37     ` Marc Zyngier
2017-10-12 12:28     ` James Morse
2017-10-12 12:28       ` James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18 ` [PATCH v3 20/20] KVM: arm64: Take any host SError before entering the guest James Morse
2017-10-05 19:18   ` James Morse
2017-10-18 16:55 ` [PATCH v3 00/20] SError rework + RAS&IESB for firmware first support Catalin Marinas
2017-10-18 16:55   ` Catalin Marinas

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=59E78BEF.4060300@arm.com \
    --to=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Zhang@cavium.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=wangxiongfeng2@huawei.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@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.