From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D12A47F2F2; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:16:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784128618; cv=none; b=SUjuUpf894IbNdydg0kFtApOxYwNRm/X5onDI9Q5xRsmCYU+mOtCDCU27HPcFa+9pLqe4Mui4HKKp68MrH3eTcrb2jMmff5w+R2ggdG872OY7++YRS+q2bkJQTZGWsi3n3v4C85PRzJbETBkyiu3u9chcq3uX5fDmU8gd/j5L5U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784128618; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Elyu2hBbLCzVOZv+VKUbmy1slaLvbqNRvF6FD7GR/d8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=dSy40BAbUO3U4t8MKhvXqV+qgpSwKaSNOzNlcplAbbgoTpONtQ4nZZL1Xwv1qNmaFwdwnN1EoRMe4wVpsdRhiQq0RrBpEVqnbbjskg2546YVwD66CpTKbvkKX26X1PNOrNYTwX6teQFnpJVAqyM0/6SmNuNY5KYrYP6dpXr0yAc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=VU2ekDC/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="VU2ekDC/" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53C141477; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 08:16:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.2.212.8] (e134344.arm.com [10.2.212.8]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E28683F905; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 08:16:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1784128616; bh=Elyu2hBbLCzVOZv+VKUbmy1slaLvbqNRvF6FD7GR/d8=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=VU2ekDC/Y1ZZJYP6uA7vaTByi5nq5SBTz7aEz0edcZG04Pj6nSi/pa52RUTM4FHZy 4aUseb9LXATvNNOm0yFrXdUOSxsMmbaC0HMjkElsGB9jd6H3Pk+0lS0RUL6lAJ90Eb NeTyNiUv4dyw614l8r+3X19xrAMkFsS+1j4b/zyk= Message-ID: <42eff7e7-695c-4e2a-aae2-8abd1b92f615@arm.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 16:16:52 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Thunderbird Daily Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 13/16] arm_mpam: prepare mon_sel locking for MPAM-Fb To: Andre Przywara , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Hanjun Guo , Sudeep Holla , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , James Morse , Reinette Chatre , Fenghua Yu Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Srivathsa L Rao , Ganapatrao Kulkarni , Trilok Soni , Srinivas Ramana , Niyas Sait , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260710144520.917375-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20260710144520.917375-14-andre.przywara@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Ben Horgan In-Reply-To: <20260710144520.917375-14-andre.przywara@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Andre, On 7/10/26 15:45, Andre Przywara wrote: > The MSC MON_SEL register needs to be accessed from hardirq for the overflow > interrupt, and when taking an IPI to access these registers on platforms > where MSC are not accesible from every CPU. This makes an irqsave > spinlock the obvious lock to protect these registers. On systems with SCMI > mailboxes it must be able to sleep, meaning a mutex must be used. The > SCMI platforms can't support an overflow interrupt. > Clearly these two can't exist for one MSC at the same time. Is an MPAM-Fb platform using overflow interrupts definitely not possible? I would have thought that as long as things were fast enough that threaded interrupts could be used. I do agree that it would make things harder and the increased latency may make it unworkable. > > Change the mon_sel locking wrapper function to only use a spinlock when > the MSC is accessed directly via MMIO. In case of MPAM-Fb, we use a > mutex, but only if we are in a sleepable context. If that's not the > case, we return an error. This should not happen, as MPAM-Fb by design > does not require an MSC access to happen from a specific CPU, so there > is no need for any IPIs or preemption disabling to satisfy CPU > constraints. It'd be good to mention that on the rare occasion that all cpus are no_hz_full and resctrl does the monitor read via IPI that we already bail out early. Thanks, Ben And since overflow interrupts are not supported at the moment > anyway, we also wouldn't meet the other case. > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara > --- > drivers/resctrl/mpam_internal.h | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_internal.h b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_internal.h > index 04d1a59f02af..7b6e0df904f8 100644 > --- a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_internal.h > +++ b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_internal.h > @@ -126,6 +126,7 @@ struct mpam_msc { > */ > raw_spinlock_t _mon_sel_lock; > unsigned long _mon_sel_flags; > + struct mutex mon_sel_mutex; > > void __iomem *mapped_hwpage; > size_t mapped_hwpage_sz; > @@ -139,27 +140,44 @@ struct mpam_msc { > /* Returning false here means accesses to mon_sel must fail and report an error. */ > static inline bool __must_check mpam_mon_sel_lock(struct mpam_msc *msc) > { > - /* Locking will require updating to support a firmware backed interface */ > - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(msc->iface != MPAM_IFACE_MMIO)) > + if (msc->iface == MPAM_IFACE_MMIO) { > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&msc->_mon_sel_lock, msc->_mon_sel_flags); > + > + return true; > + } > + > + if (!preemptible()) > return false; > > - raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&msc->_mon_sel_lock, msc->_mon_sel_flags); > + mutex_lock(&msc->mon_sel_mutex); > + > return true; > } > > static inline void mpam_mon_sel_unlock(struct mpam_msc *msc) > { > - raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&msc->_mon_sel_lock, msc->_mon_sel_flags); > + if (msc->iface == MPAM_IFACE_MMIO) { > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&msc->_mon_sel_lock, > + msc->_mon_sel_flags); > + > + return; > + } > + > + mutex_unlock(&msc->mon_sel_mutex); > } > > static inline void mpam_mon_sel_lock_held(struct mpam_msc *msc) > { > - lockdep_assert_held_once(&msc->_mon_sel_lock); > + if (msc->iface == MPAM_IFACE_MMIO) > + lockdep_assert_held_once(&msc->_mon_sel_lock); > + else > + lockdep_assert_held_once(&msc->mon_sel_mutex); > } > > static inline void mpam_mon_sel_lock_init(struct mpam_msc *msc) > { > raw_spin_lock_init(&msc->_mon_sel_lock); > + mutex_init(&msc->mon_sel_mutex); > } > > /* Bits for mpam features bitmaps */