From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E9D4CDB465 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:13:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To: Subject:Cc:To:From:Message-ID:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=mVAa/W3mVmU4Sgy9SROHg8EdFGDoStnbLZXCek6ae7A=; b=B/xrM9cQErGf62 0OwpI0HBRaDAL3iixSkNON4grR3bYXahDidAEYsjqi9AaqKwiDqHy6qPKtSB4f7jOxRCjSrE/oOxB Ashn+oCkQcbr/fWMJHB6CSggzLzI/RdaRClfOeD4MMeYrPC2HZgbdwkK6Vlv2YEqMorLsmGLLuG7Z 6cvrwjsRicWkEJYepm2hnO8U+NWvHvVJiLl1DL8VgksgyeW2aWutNA48TX0bB9GMLQTbMe2Byj0bF /Qq+txkW0VDw1wsX/dE3gpxyPDHGmGmge6trvGzgOI5unLbKvDWfGjEi1Maa1a7nxLBxgARkVftc4 d2n4lgHFYzD0AYawhZYQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qtQxT-00H8ef-2a; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:12:55 +0000 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org ([145.40.73.55]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qtQxQ-00H8dD-18 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:12:54 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87053CE2B52; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B454CC433C8; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:12:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1697713969; bh=XTqMeSpKqcuasX9eby3qHv7gedznY2jckAT9FxyMVsI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Vut8FnJjXNgyZ7kXP3YKB2xGB0cR5yJAnVCUOZ1fOr2tcljAAqeR43RMuY7nLjwi+ MEU+dZyNp4FrqVRRObTJYfDii7w3STJTWj0lDBENOtxgc5tUWFXKSw437RKBtdn+Db dIc5sNGIKpHAL6eN/GCr58GIYa/qsxUVeSs1SzlJ8sKEOv9f428fFmyh2GeoSXoyq2 rj+bTcyst/9KgEgUY9+goPaDOOemGn9te77MCajxs9zJqp2HMnRjnSzsDY0BA79BlU XnPidvZcWLNwbIbA2Njr0M7hdWon5TFyyW3hpxtCSTXgYFsmSoxT/hg2I+xL2VPAtq jMdjhFk2XptxQ== Received: from sofa.misterjones.org ([185.219.108.64] helo=goblin-girl.misterjones.org) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1qtQxL-005ilA-7y; Thu, 19 Oct 2023 12:12:47 +0100 Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 12:12:45 +0100 Message-ID: <86lebyn9w2.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Robin Murphy , Mark Rutland , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Fang Xiang Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] irqchip/gic-v3: Enable non-coherent redistributors/ITSes ACPI probing In-Reply-To: References: <20230905104721.52199-1-lpieralisi@kernel.org> <20231006125929.48591-1-lpieralisi@kernel.org> <20231006125929.48591-6-lpieralisi@kernel.org> <86v8b5mc5v.wl-maz@kernel.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/29.1 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 185.219.108.64 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: lpieralisi@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, rafael@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, fangxiang3@xiaomi.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20231019_041252_741098_4014D4CA X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 51.18 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:42:14 +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 05:44:28PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Oct 2023 15:19:46 +0100, > > Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 02:59:29PM +0200, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > > The GIC architecture specification defines a set of registers > > > > for redistributors and ITSes that control the sharebility and > > > > cacheability attributes of redistributors/ITSes initiator ports > > > > on the interconnect (GICR_[V]PROPBASER, GICR_[V]PENDBASER, > > > > GITS_BASER). > > > > > > > > Architecturally the GIC provides a means to drive shareability > > > > and cacheability attributes signals and related IWB/OWB/ISH barriers > > > > but it is not mandatory for designs to wire up the corresponding > > > > interconnect signals that control the cacheability/shareability > > > > of transactions. > > > > > > > > Redistributors and ITSes interconnect ports can be connected to > > > > non-coherent interconnects that are not able to manage the > > > > shareability/cacheability attributes; this implicitly makes > > > > the redistributors and ITSes non-coherent observers. > > > > > > > > So far, the GIC driver on probe executes a write to "probe" for > > > > the redistributors and ITSes registers shareability bitfields > > > > by writing a value (ie InnerShareable - the shareability domain the > > > > CPUs are in) and check it back to detect whether the value sticks or > > > > not; this hinges on a GIC programming model behaviour that predates the > > > > current specifications, that just define shareability bits as writeable > > > > but do not guarantee that writing certain shareability values > > > > enable the expected behaviour for the redistributors/ITSes > > > > memory interconnect ports. > > > > > > > > To enable non-coherent GIC designs on ACPI based systems, parse the MADT > > > > GICC/GICR/ITS subtables non-coherent flags to determine whether the > > > > respective components are non-coherent observers and force the shareability > > > > attributes to be programmed into the redistributors and ITSes registers. > > > > > > > > An ACPI global function (acpi_get_madt_revision()) is added to retrieve > > > > the MADT revision, in that it is essential to check the MADT revision > > > > before checking for flags that were added with MADT revision 7 so that > > > > if the kernel is booted with ACPI tables (MADT rev < 7) it skips parsing > > > > the newly added flags (that should be zeroed reserved values for MADT > > > > versions < 7 but they could turn out to be buggy and should be ignored). > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi > > > > Cc: Robin Murphy > > > > Cc: Mark Rutland > > > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" > > > > Cc: Marc Zyngier > > > > --- > > > > drivers/acpi/processor_core.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-common.h | 8 ++++++++ > > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3-its.c | 4 ++++ > > > > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 9 +++++++++ > > > > include/linux/acpi.h | 3 +++ > > > > 5 files changed, 45 insertions(+) > > > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > > > just a quick note to ask if, from an ACPI binding POW > > > > I guess you mean POV. POW has an entirely different meaning... :-/ > > > > > this patch and related approach make sense to you. > > > > > > If so, we can start the process to get the ACPI changes drafted > > > in: > > > > > > https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4557 > > > > > > and deployed in this patch into the ACPI specs, I can log > > > an "ACK" in the tianocoreBZ entry above (we will be able to > > > rework the code as much as we want, this is just for the > > > bindings). > > > > I'm OK with the overall shape of it. However, I wonder what the > > rationale is for spreading the redistributor property all over the map > > (in both GICC and GICR structures), while it could be set once and for > > all in the core MADT flags (32 bits, of which only one is in use). > > > > It is bad enough that there are two ways of getting the GICR regions. > > Why can't the properties that apply to all of the be common? > > I don't think we are allowed to add arch specific flags to the MADT > since those, supposedly, are cross-architecture (and the only one > defined is quite old, though x86 specific). There is nothing that is truly cross-arch in this table. *everything* in MADT is arch-specific. > The reason behind spreading the property is the nature of GICC/GICR > subtables themselves - we wanted to apply flags only in subtables > relevant to the components in question. > > We could try to add a global flag to the MADT but I would not be > surprised if the ECR would be rejected then for the reason I explained > above. I don't think that's much of a reason, but I really don't care enough about this to argue otherwise. M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel