linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 02/13] arm64: cpufeatures: Correctly handle signed values
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 11:45:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231127114559.990314-3-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231127114559.990314-1-maz@kernel.org>

Although we've had signed values for some features such as PMUv3
and FP, the code that handles the comparaison with some limit
has a couple of annoying issues:

- the min_field_value is always unsigned, meaning that we cannot
  easily compare it with a negative value

- it is not possible to have a range of values, let alone a range
  of negative values

Fix this by:

- adding an upper limit to the comparison, defaulting to all bits
  being set to the maximum positive value

- ensuring that the signess of the min and max values are taken into
  account

A ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS_NEG() macro is provided for signed features, but
nothing is using it yet.

Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h |  1 +
 arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c      | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 2 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
index f6d416fe49b0..5f3f62efebd5 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
@@ -363,6 +363,7 @@ struct arm64_cpu_capabilities {
 			u8 field_pos;
 			u8 field_width;
 			u8 min_field_value;
+			u8 max_field_value;
 			u8 hwcap_type;
 			bool sign;
 			unsigned long hwcap;
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
index 646591c67e7a..bc8787f28ffd 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
@@ -140,12 +140,42 @@ void dump_cpu_features(void)
 	pr_emerg("0x%*pb\n", ARM64_NCAPS, &system_cpucaps);
 }
 
+#define __ARM64_MAX_POSITIVE(reg, field)				\
+		((reg##_##field##_SIGNED ?				\
+		  BIT(reg##_##field##_WIDTH - 1) :			\
+		  BIT(reg##_##field##_WIDTH)) - 1)
+
+#define __ARM64_MIN_NEGATIVE(reg, field)  BIT(reg##_##field##_WIDTH - 1)
+
+#define __ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS(reg, field, min_value, max_value)		\
+		.sys_reg = SYS_##reg,					\
+		.field_pos = reg##_##field##_SHIFT,			\
+		.field_width = reg##_##field##_WIDTH,			\
+		.sign = reg##_##field##_SIGNED,				\
+		.min_field_value = min_value,				\
+		.max_field_value = max_value,
+
+/*
+ * ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS() encodes a field with a range from min_value to
+ * an implicit maximum that depends on the sign-ess of the field.
+ *
+ * An unsigned field will be capped at all ones, while a signed field
+ * will be limited to the positive half only.
+ */
 #define ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS(reg, field, min_value)			\
-		.sys_reg = SYS_##reg,							\
-		.field_pos = reg##_##field##_SHIFT,						\
-		.field_width = reg##_##field##_WIDTH,						\
-		.sign = reg##_##field##_SIGNED,							\
-		.min_field_value = reg##_##field##_##min_value,
+	__ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS(reg, field,				\
+			     SYS_FIELD_VALUE(reg, field, min_value),	\
+			     __ARM64_MAX_POSITIVE(reg, field))
+
+/*
+ * ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS_NEG() encodes a field with a range from an
+ * implicit minimal value to max_value. This should be used when
+ * matching a non-implemented property.
+ */
+#define ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS_NEG(reg, field, max_value)			\
+	__ARM64_CPUID_FIELDS(reg, field,				\
+			     __ARM64_MIN_NEGATIVE(reg, field),		\
+			     SYS_FIELD_VALUE(reg, field, max_value))
 
 #define __ARM64_FTR_BITS(SIGNED, VISIBLE, STRICT, TYPE, SHIFT, WIDTH, SAFE_VAL) \
 	{						\
@@ -1470,11 +1500,28 @@ has_always(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int scope)
 static bool
 feature_matches(u64 reg, const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry)
 {
-	int val = cpuid_feature_extract_field_width(reg, entry->field_pos,
-						    entry->field_width,
-						    entry->sign);
+	int val, min, max;
+	u64 tmp;
+
+	val = cpuid_feature_extract_field_width(reg, entry->field_pos,
+						entry->field_width,
+						entry->sign);
+
+	tmp = entry->min_field_value;
+	tmp <<= entry->field_pos;
+
+	min = cpuid_feature_extract_field_width(tmp, entry->field_pos,
+						entry->field_width,
+						entry->sign);
+
+	tmp = entry->max_field_value;
+	tmp <<= entry->field_pos;
+
+	max = cpuid_feature_extract_field_width(tmp, entry->field_pos,
+						entry->field_width,
+						entry->sign);
 
-	return val >= entry->min_field_value;
+	return val >= min && val <= max;
 }
 
 static u64
-- 
2.39.2


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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-11-27 11:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-27 11:45 [PATCH v3 00/13] arm64: Add support for FEAT_E2H0, or lack thereof Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 01/13] arm64: Add macro to compose a sysreg field value Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2023-12-11 12:24   ` [PATCH v3 02/13] arm64: cpufeatures: Correctly handle signed values Will Deacon
2024-01-08 17:46     ` Marc Zyngier
2024-01-09 11:40       ` Marc Zyngier
2024-01-30 11:34         ` Will Deacon
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 03/13] arm64: cpufeature: Correctly display signed override values Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 04/13] arm64: sysreg: Add layout for ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1 Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 05/13] arm64: cpufeature: Add ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1 handling Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 06/13] arm64: cpufeature: Detect E2H0 not being implemented Marc Zyngier
2023-12-11 12:42   ` Will Deacon
2024-01-09 15:16     ` Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 07/13] arm64: cpufeature: Detect HCR_EL2.NV1 being RES0 Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 08/13] arm64: Treat HCR_EL2.E2H as RES1 when ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 is negative Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 09/13] arm64: Add override for ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 10/13] arm64: Add MIDR-based override infrastructure Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 11/13] arm64: Add MIDR-based overrides for ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1.E2H0 Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 12/13] KVM: arm64: Expose ID_AA64MMFR4_EL1 to guests Marc Zyngier
2023-11-27 11:45 ` [PATCH v3 13/13] KVM: arm64: Force guest's HCR_EL2.E2H RES1 when NV1 is not implemented 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=20231127114559.990314-3-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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).