From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: erratum: Workaround for Kryo reserved system register read
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 07:49:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <570B48F0.5020408@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <570786C9.6020804@arm.com>
On 08/04/16 11:24, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 08/04/16 10:58, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> On 07/04/16 18:31, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>
>>>> + All system register encodings above use the form
>>>> +
>>>> + Op0, Op1, CRn, CRm, Op2.
>>>> +
>>>> + Note that some of the encodings listed above include
>>>> + the system register space reserved for the following
>>>> + identification registers which may appear in future revisions
>>>> + of the ARM architecture beyond ARMv8.0.
>>>> + This space includes:
>>>> + ID_AA64PFR[2-7]_EL1
>>>> + ID_AA64DFR[2-3]_EL1
>>>> + ID_AA64AFR[2-3]_EL1
>>>> + ID_AA64ISAR[2-7]_EL1
>>>> + ID_AA64MMFR[2-7]_EL1
>>
>>
>> AFAIK, the id space is unassigned. So the naming above could cause confusion
>> if the register is named something else.
>
> It is reserved *at the moment*, but already has a defined behaviour. My
> worry is that when some new architecture revision comes around, we start
> using these registers without thinking much about it (because we should
> be able to). At this point, your SoC will catch fire and nobody will
> have a clue about the problem because it is not apparent in the code.
>
> I'd really like to see something a bit more forward looking that covers
> that space for good.
At the risk of volunteering...
Registering these instructions with the undef hooks would be ideal, but they
won't catch this instruction abort. I guess refactor them to be generic faulting
instruction hooks, and have a list for the existing undef cases, and a new one
for this instruction abort.
This won't cover early code in head.S, or KVM code that runs at EL2. Is this
sufficient, or should any approach cover those too?
Thanks,
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-11 6:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-07 15:54 [PATCH] arm64: erratum: Workaround for Kryo reserved system register read Naveen Kaje
2016-04-07 17:31 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-04-08 9:58 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-08 10:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-04-08 10:31 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-08 11:00 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-04-11 6:49 ` James Morse [this message]
2016-04-11 10:06 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-12 13:27 ` Catalin Marinas
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=570B48F0.5020408@arm.com \
--to=james.morse@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).