public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: spin-table: handle unmapped cpu-release-addrs
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 13:30:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140730123029.GA20162@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKv+Gu-891BPCMCB2xnhsaUHxz_BCMkwbbwQ76kmK=JsUdifHQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 01:00:40PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On 30 July 2014 13:30, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:59:02AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >> From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> >>
> >> In certain cases the cpu-release-addr of a CPU may not fall in the
> >> linear mapping (e.g. when the kernel is loaded above this address due to
> >> the presence of other images in memory). This is problematic for the
> >> spin-table code as it assumes that it can trivially convert a
> >> cpu-release-addr to a valid VA in the linear map.
> >>
> >> This patch modifies the spin-table code to use a temporary cached
> >> mapping to write to a given cpu-release-addr, enabling us to support
> >> addresses regardless of whether they are covered by the linear mapping.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> >> Tested-by: Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>
> >> [ardb: added (__force void *) cast]
> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/kernel/smp_spin_table.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++-----
> >>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > I'm nervous about this. What if the spin table sits in the same physical 64k
> > frame as a read-sensitive device and we're running with 64k pages?
> >
> 
> I see what you mean. This is potentially hairy, as EFI already
> ioremap_cache()s everything known to it as normal DRAM, so using plain
> ioremap() here if pfn_valid() returns false for cpu-release-addr's PFN
> may still result in mappings with different attributes for the same
> region. So how should we decide whether to call ioremap() or
> ioremap_cache() in this case?

If we're careful about handling mismatched attributes we might be able
to get away with always using a device mapping.

I'll need to have a think about that, I'm not sure on the architected
cache behaviour in such a case.

Thanks,
Mark.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-07-30 12:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-07-30 10:59 [PATCH 0/3 v2] arm64/efi: improve TEXT_OFFSET handling Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 10:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: spin-table: handle unmapped cpu-release-addrs Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 11:30   ` Will Deacon
2014-07-30 12:00     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 12:05       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 12:30       ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2014-07-30 12:42         ` Will Deacon
2014-07-30 12:49           ` Mark Rutland
2014-07-30 13:10             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 13:28               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 19:17     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-31  9:45       ` Will Deacon
2014-07-31  9:58         ` Mark Rutland
2014-07-31 10:04           ` Will Deacon
2014-07-31 10:16             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-31 10:39             ` Mark Rutland
2014-08-01 11:35               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-31 14:41             ` Mark Salter
2014-07-31 10:01         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-07-30 10:59 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] arm64/efi: efistub: cover entire static mem footprint in PE/COFF .text Ard Biesheuvel
2014-08-14 11:31   ` Mark Rutland
2014-07-30 10:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] arm64/efi: efistub: don't abort if base of DRAM is occupied Ard Biesheuvel
2014-08-14 11:32   ` Mark Rutland
2014-08-20 17:10     ` Matt Fleming
2014-08-20 17:35       ` Mark Rutland
2014-08-21  8:00         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-08-21  9:22           ` Matt Fleming
2014-09-09 19:39         ` Jon Masters
2014-09-10  8:39           ` Will Deacon
2014-08-13 17:29 ` [PATCH 0/3 v2] arm64/efi: improve TEXT_OFFSET handling Leif Lindholm
     [not found] <CAKv+Gu_UjRNhhiM0GPsKRdXRtmEnY6cbpY-JZ33RUMapbPYsbQ@mail.gmail.com>
2014-08-13 12:58 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] arm64: spin-table: handle unmapped cpu-release-addrs Mark Rutland
2014-08-14 17:13   ` Catalin Marinas
2014-08-14 18:10     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-08-15 11:57       ` Will Deacon
2014-08-15 12:07         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-08-15 12:53           ` Will Deacon
2014-08-15 13:28             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2014-08-15 14:35               ` Mark Salter
2014-08-15 14:38                 ` Will Deacon
2014-08-17  0:06                   ` Leif Lindholm
2014-08-18 16:47                     ` Catalin Marinas
2014-08-18 17:22                       ` Ard Biesheuvel

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=20140730123029.GA20162@leverpostej \
    --to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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