From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Sami Mujawar <Sami.Mujawar@arm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/14] arm64/nmi: Manage masking for superpriority interrupts along with DAIF
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 09:37:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y5g55A3N9rXmS4LK@lpieralisi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y5c0tW7sidPE0oxd@sirena.org.uk>
On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 02:03:33PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2022 at 06:19:02PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>
> > I think I found a nasty spot. We are currently not handling ALLINT in
> > arch_local_irq_enable/disable(). The issue I am facing is that we might
> > end up preempting in IRQ context with ALLINT set in the exception path
> > - arm64_preempt_schedule_irq() - which means we are running with all
> > IRQs masked (that's normal; what's not normal is that local_irq_enable()
> > does not clear ALLINT, see below).
>
> Right, and handling ALLINT in arch_local_irq_enable/disable() isn't
> exactly ideal since it means that whenever we mask interrupts we also
> mask NMIs which somewhat reduces the value.
Understood but ALLINT should be cleared before scheduling on the
exception path that leads to preemption - where it is done to
be seen.
> > When we schedule (preempt_schedule_irq()) we do require a
> > local_irq_enable() to enable IRQs; ALLINT is still set, so
> > local_irq_enable() does not do what is expected so we are calling
> > __schedule() with IRQs disabled, which does not seem right.
>
> > Now we need to debate what the fix for this can be but nonetheless
> > it is something to be addressed.
>
> A first pass suggests that we should be handling this like we do for
> other preemptions and returning early from arm64_preempt_schedule_irq()
> if ALLINT is masked. If we are handling a regular IRQ then ALLINT will
> be unmasked and we'll call into preempt_schedule_irq(), if we're
> handling a NMI then ALLINT will still be masked so we don't attempt to
> schedule. I've pushed out a change which does this but not yet properly
> tested it.
Yes that's what should happen (actually if we are handling an NMI we
should not even get to the point where a decision about preemption is
made el1_interrupt() just returns).
> > Clearing and setting ALLINT in arch_local_irq_enable()/disable()
> > seems to solve the issue (now I moved on to debugging something
> > else, will post the outcome here because this fix does not seem
> > to fix the issue completely or I am hitting another bug).
>
> Do you have any specifics on how you're seeing problems? You did
> mention boot stalls offline but I've not been able to to reproduce this
> locally in a way that I can identify (based on your mail now I've made
> sure I've got preemption enabled).
defconfig, barebone rootfs, boot stalls (because we are scheduling with
IRQs off and there is nothing clearing ALLINT in the preemption path
so system hangs).
I don't know why you can't reproduce it don't know if it is the Kconfig
or file system configuration (or the FVP params - for this to show up
FEAT_NMI must obviously be enabled - I am testing the branch Marc posted
so that I can test the vGIC patches but this is definitely not a vGIC
bug).
Thanks,
Lorenzo
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-13 8:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-12 15:16 [PATCH v2 00/14] arm64/nmi: Support for FEAT_NMI Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:16 ` [PATCH v2 01/14] arm64/booting: Document boot requirements " Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:16 ` [PATCH v2 02/14] arm64/sysreg: Add definition for ICC_NMIAR1_EL1 Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:16 ` [PATCH v2 03/14] arm64/sysreg: Add definition of ISR_EL1 Mark Brown
2022-12-05 16:45 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-11-12 15:16 ` [PATCH v2 04/14] arm64/sysreg: Add definitions for immediate versions of MSR ALLINT Mark Brown
2022-12-05 16:38 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-05 17:11 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-07 19:18 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-07 19:42 ` Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:16 ` [PATCH v2 05/14] arm64/asm: Introduce assembly macros for managing ALLINT Mark Brown
2022-12-05 17:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-05 18:24 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-07 19:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 06/14] arm64/hyp-stub: Enable access to ALLINT Mark Brown
2022-12-05 17:50 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 07/14] arm64/idreg: Add an override for FEAT_NMI Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 08/14] arm64/cpufeature: Detect PE support " Mark Brown
2022-12-05 18:03 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-05 19:32 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-07 19:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 09/14] KVM: arm64: Hide FEAT_NMI from guests Mark Brown
2022-12-05 18:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-05 19:03 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-07 19:03 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-07 19:33 ` Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 10/14] arm64/nmi: Manage masking for superpriority interrupts along with DAIF Mark Brown
2022-12-05 18:47 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-05 20:52 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-08 17:19 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2022-12-12 14:03 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-13 8:37 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2022-12-13 13:15 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-15 13:32 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-12 14:40 ` Mark Rutland
2022-12-15 13:21 ` Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 11/14] arm64/irq: Document handling of FEAT_NMI in irqflags.h Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 12/14] arm64/nmi: Add handling of superpriority interrupts as NMIs Mark Brown
2022-12-07 11:03 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-07 13:24 ` Mark Brown
2022-12-07 18:57 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-07 19:15 ` Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 13/14] arm64/nmi: Add Kconfig for NMI Mark Brown
2022-11-12 15:17 ` [PATCH v2 14/14] irqchip/gic-v3: Implement FEAT_GICv3_NMI support Mark Brown
2022-12-07 15:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2022-12-02 18:42 ` [PATCH v2 00/14] arm64/nmi: Support for FEAT_NMI Marc Zyngier
2022-12-03 8:25 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2022-12-03 9:45 ` Marc Zyngier
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=Y5g55A3N9rXmS4LK@lpieralisi \
--to=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=Sami.Mujawar@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.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