linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: shiraz.linux.kernel@gmail.com (shiraz hashim)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: PL310 and QoS logic
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 23:05:19 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikKpNCQnaPLMD_HcEby_VV0n8YRL7jYHtxPH8ba@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288186380.17877.75.camel@e102109-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Hello Catalin,

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Catalin Marinas
<catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 14:09 +0100, shiraz hashim wrote:
>> We were going through ARM PL310 errata list and we came across bug
>> #738415, which says
>> "738415: ? A cacheable read with address bits [20:5] equal to 0x0000
>> can be stalled by non-cacheable read traffic targeting other address
>> region 2"
>>
>> We believe this could be one of the potential problems which we are
>> facing, and the
>> errata says the implication could be that there could be a deadlock if
>> there are dependent
>> reads.
>>
>> Now, how do we ensure that this is the root cause. What is the best
>> way in which I
>> can prevent kernel from using cache-lines at each 2MB boundary.
>> Have you come across this bug? Any information would be really helpful.
>
> I think more information or conditions for this to happen can be given
> by support at arm.com. I don't know the hardware details around this.

OK.

> In general you don't have any cacheable/non-cacheable dependent reads in
> Linux to be able to trigger the deadlock. That's a situation where one
> CPU is polling some non-cacheable memory location and a different CPU
> cannot continue. The only situation I'm aware of is during secondary CPU
> booting or if you boot Linux with CPU with a maxcpus less than the total
> number of CPUs (so some of them keep polling the pen_release even at
> run-time). But that's easily solvable with a WFE in the pen polling loop
> (if your platform has such booting protocol).
>
> On the RealView platforms, the secondary CPUs are waiting in a WFI in
> the boot monitor code and waken up one by one via an IPI, so they don't
> usually wait in the pen polling loop.
>
> If you want to prevent such memory from being used, you can hack the
> memory initialisation code in Linux to reserve a 4K physical page for
> every 2MB.

I am not very sure how to do it. Can I use reserve_bootmem_node from
bootmem_init.

-- 
regards
Shiraz Hashim

      reply	other threads:[~2010-10-27 17:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-08-02 14:44 PL310 and QoS logic Armando VISCONTI
2010-10-06  8:48 ` shiraz hashim
2010-10-27 13:09   ` shiraz hashim
2010-10-27 13:33     ` Catalin Marinas
2010-10-27 17:35       ` shiraz hashim [this message]

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=AANLkTikKpNCQnaPLMD_HcEby_VV0n8YRL7jYHtxPH8ba@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=shiraz.linux.kernel@gmail.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).