Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Workaround inconsistent PMR setting on NMI entry

From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	valentin.schneider@arm.com, kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/gic-v3: Workaround inconsistent PMR setting on NMI entry
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 17:26:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87h7i5r8i3.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210610155917.GA63335@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 16:59:30 +0100,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Marc,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 03:57:31PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > The arm64 entry code suffers from an annoying issue on taking
> > a NMI, as it sets PMR to a value that actually allows IRQs
> > to be acknowledged. This is done for consistency with other parts
> > of the code, and is in the process of being fixed. This shouldn't
> > be a problem, as we are not enabling interrupts whilst in NMI
> > context.
> > 
> > However, in the infortunate scenario that we took a spurious NMI
> > (retired before the read of IAR) *and* that there is an IRQ pending
> > at the same time, we'll ack the IRQ in NMI context. Too bad.
> > 
> > In order to avoid deadlocks while running something like perf,
> > teach the GICv3 driver about this situation: if we were in
> > a context where no interrupt should have fired, transiently
> > set PMR to a value that only allows NMIs before acking the pending
> > interrupt, and restore the original value after that.
> > 
> > This papers over the core issue for the time being, and makes
> > NMIs great again. Sort of.
> > 
> > Co-developed-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> 
> According to the kernel documentation, a Co-developed-by should be
> immediately followed by that developer's Signed-off-by, so FWIW:
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> 
> ... unless you want to downgrade that to a Suggested-by, which is also
> fine by me!

Nah, we both wasted too many grey bits on this one, and I want shared
responsibility for it!

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> 
> Having played about with a few options, I think this is the
> simplest/cleanest thing we can do for now, and given it's all in one
> place and "obviously correct", I think there's little risk that this
> will break something else. So:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> 
> We should probably also give this:
> 
> Fixes: 4d6a38da8e79e94c ("arm64: entry: always set GIC_PRIO_PSR_I_SET during entry")
> 
> ... since prior to that commit the `gic_prio_irq_setup` gunk would
> prevent this specific problem (though other bits like
> local_daif_{save,restore}()) would be broken in NMI paths.

Yup. I'll add that too and send it as a fix for -rc6.

Thanks,

	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