From: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
To: Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Bhupesh SHARMA <bhupesh.linux@gmail.com>,
kexec mailing list <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: invalidate TLB before turning MMU on
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 08:39:46 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1544708386.18411.13.camel@lca.pw> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACi5LpP+NHa1WQg78xm1y1YM0KXnFJ72pw+YrizxR5y7yt4AiQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2018-12-13 at 11:10 +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi Qian Cai,
>
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 10:53 AM Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
> >
> > On this HPE Apollo 70 arm64 server with 256 CPUs, triggering a crash
> > dump just hung. It has 4 threads on each core. Each 2-core share a same
> > L1 and L2 caches, so that is 8 CPUs shares those. All CPUs share a same
> > L3 cache.
> >
> > It turned out that this was due to the TLB contained stale entries (or
> > uninitialized junk which just happened to look valid) from the first
> > kernel before turning the MMU on in the second kernel which caused this
> > instruction hung,
> >
> > msr sctlr_el1, x0
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/head.S | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> > index 4471f570a295..5196f3d729de 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> > @@ -771,6 +771,10 @@ ENTRY(__enable_mmu)
> > msr ttbr0_el1, x2 // load TTBR0
> > msr ttbr1_el1, x1 // load TTBR1
> > isb
> > + dsb nshst
> > + tlbi vmalle1 // invalidate TLB
> > + dsb nsh
> > + isb
>
> This will be executed both for the primary and kdump kernel, right? I
> don't think we really want to invalidate the TLB when booting the
> primary kernel.
> It would be too slow and considering that we need to minimize boot
> timings on embedded arm64 devices, I think it would not be a good
> idea.
Yes, it will be executed for the first kernel as well. As James mentioned, it
needs to be done to invalidate TLB that might be used by bootloader anyway.
>
> > msr sctlr_el1, x0
> > isb
> > /*
> > --
> > 2.17.2 (Apple Git-113)
> >
>
> Also did you check this issue I reported on the HPE apollo machines
> some days back with the kdump kernel boot
> <https://www.spinics.net/lists/kexec/msg21750.html>.
> Can you please confirm that you are not facing the same issue (as I
> suspect from reading your earlier Bug Report) on the HPE apollo
> machine. Also adding 'earlycon' to the bootargs being passed to the
> kdump kernel you can see if you are able to atleast get some console
> output from the kdump kernel.
No, here did not encounter the problem you mentioned.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-13 13:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-10 22:30 arm64: kdump broken on a large CPU system Qian Cai
2018-12-11 10:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-12-11 11:34 ` James Morse
2018-12-12 2:51 ` AKASHI, Takahiro
2018-12-12 4:39 ` Qian Cai
2018-12-12 22:37 ` Qian Cai
2018-12-13 5:22 ` [PATCH] arm64: invalidate TLB before turning MMU on Qian Cai
2018-12-13 5:40 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-12-13 13:39 ` Qian Cai [this message]
2018-12-13 10:44 ` James Morse
2018-12-13 13:44 ` Qian Cai
2018-12-14 4:08 ` [PATCH v2] arm64: invalidate TLB just " Qian Cai
2018-12-14 5:01 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-12-14 12:54 ` Qian Cai
2018-12-14 7:23 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-12-15 1:53 ` Qian Cai
2019-01-10 20:00 ` Bhupesh Sharma
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=1544708386.18411.13.camel@lca.pw \
--to=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bhsharma@redhat.com \
--cc=bhupesh.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).