From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] clocksource/arm_arch_timer: Enable and verify MMIO access
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 15:00:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56B89F98.7020909@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <71bf617f4083b116b2aeab24f13fc5fed99a816f.1454327031.git.robin.murphy@arm.com>
On 02/01/2016 01:00 PM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> So far, we have been blindly assuming that having access to a
> memory-mapped timer frame implies that the individual elements of that
> frame frame are already enabled. Whilst it's the firmware's job to give
> us non-secure access to frames in the first place, we should not rely
> on implementations always being generous enough to also configure CNTACR
> for those non-secure frames (e.g. [1]).
>
> Explicitly enable feature-level access per-frame, and verify that the
> access we want is really implemented before trying to make use of it.
>
> [1]:https://github.com/ARM-software/tf-issues/issues/170
>
> Signed-off-by: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
> ---
Hi Marc,
can you give your opinion on this patch ?
Thanks
-- Daniel
> Changes from v1:
> - Remove CNTACR_RFRQ check since the "no access, CNTFRQ reads as zero"
> case can be handled the same way the driver deals with the "CNTFRQ
> accessible, but not programmed" case.
> - Reword the commit message to make more sense.
>
> drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> index c64d543..7c567f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/arm_arch_timer.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,14 @@
> #define CNTTIDR 0x08
> #define CNTTIDR_VIRT(n) (BIT(1) << ((n) * 4))
>
> +#define CNTACR(n) (0x40 + ((n) * 4))
> +#define CNTACR_RPCT BIT(0)
> +#define CNTACR_RVCT BIT(1)
> +#define CNTACR_RFRQ BIT(2)
> +#define CNTACR_RVOFF BIT(3)
> +#define CNTACR_RWVT BIT(4)
> +#define CNTACR_RWPT BIT(5)
> +
> #define CNTVCT_LO 0x08
> #define CNTVCT_HI 0x0c
> #define CNTFRQ 0x10
> @@ -757,7 +765,6 @@ static void __init arch_timer_mem_init(struct device_node *np)
> }
>
> cnttidr = readl_relaxed(cntctlbase + CNTTIDR);
> - iounmap(cntctlbase);
>
> /*
> * Try to find a virtual capable frame. Otherwise fall back to a
> @@ -765,20 +772,31 @@ static void __init arch_timer_mem_init(struct device_node *np)
> */
> for_each_available_child_of_node(np, frame) {
> int n;
> + u32 cntacr;
>
> if (of_property_read_u32(frame, "frame-number", &n)) {
> pr_err("arch_timer: Missing frame-number\n");
> - of_node_put(best_frame);
> of_node_put(frame);
> - return;
> + goto out;
> }
>
> - if (cnttidr & CNTTIDR_VIRT(n)) {
> + /* Try enabling everything, and see what sticks */
> + cntacr = CNTACR_RFRQ | CNTACR_RWPT | CNTACR_RPCT |
> + CNTACR_RWVT | CNTACR_RVOFF | CNTACR_RVCT;
> + writel_relaxed(cntacr, cntctlbase + CNTACR(n));
> + cntacr = readl_relaxed(cntctlbase + CNTACR(n));
> +
> + if ((cnttidr & CNTTIDR_VIRT(n)) &&
> + !(~cntacr & (CNTACR_RWVT | CNTACR_RVCT))) {
> of_node_put(best_frame);
> best_frame = frame;
> arch_timer_mem_use_virtual = true;
> break;
> }
> +
> + if (~cntacr & (CNTACR_RWPT | CNTACR_RPCT))
> + continue;
> +
> of_node_put(best_frame);
> best_frame = of_node_get(frame);
> }
> @@ -786,24 +804,26 @@ static void __init arch_timer_mem_init(struct device_node *np)
> base = arch_counter_base = of_iomap(best_frame, 0);
> if (!base) {
> pr_err("arch_timer: Can't map frame's registers\n");
> - of_node_put(best_frame);
> - return;
> + goto out;
> }
>
> if (arch_timer_mem_use_virtual)
> irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(best_frame, 1);
> else
> irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(best_frame, 0);
> - of_node_put(best_frame);
> +
> if (!irq) {
> pr_err("arch_timer: Frame missing %s irq",
> arch_timer_mem_use_virtual ? "virt" : "phys");
> - return;
> + goto out;
> }
>
> arch_timer_detect_rate(base, np);
> arch_timer_mem_register(base, irq);
> arch_timer_common_init();
> +out:
> + iounmap(cntctlbase);
> + of_node_put(best_frame);
> }
> CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE(armv7_arch_timer_mem, "arm,armv7-timer-mem",
> arch_timer_mem_init);
>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-08 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-01 12:00 [PATCH v2] clocksource/arm_arch_timer: Enable and verify MMIO access Robin Murphy
2016-02-01 13:44 ` Mark Rutland
2016-02-01 19:58 ` Stephen Boyd
2016-02-05 15:29 ` Robin Murphy
2016-02-05 15:32 ` Daniel Lezcano
2016-02-05 15:34 ` Robin Murphy
2016-02-08 14:00 ` Daniel Lezcano [this message]
2016-02-08 14:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-02-08 14:30 ` Daniel Lezcano
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=56B89F98.7020909@linaro.org \
--to=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).