* Re: [PATCH] [ppc64] Fix SLB castout issue
2004-08-09 20:44 [PATCH] [ppc64] Fix SLB castout issue Anton Blanchard
@ 2004-08-10 1:49 ` David Gibson
2004-08-10 2:07 ` Linus Torvalds
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Gibson @ 2004-08-10 1:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Anton Blanchard; +Cc: akpm, torvalds, dwg, paulus, linux-kernel
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 06:44:15AM +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> The SLB rewrite removed a fix for a hard to hit bug, but the SFS guys
> managed to hit it straight away. We need to check both r1 and PACAKSAVE
> or else we could cast our kernel segment out when on the irq or softirq
> stack.
Bugger, I was aware of this issue when I did the rewrite, but I
obviously forgot to come back and check it. While doing the rewrite,
I looked at things carefully and couldn't see any reason that we need
to check against both r1 and PACAKSAVE. We do certainly need to check
PACAKSAVE *instead* of r1, though - I thought I'd done that, but
obviously forgot to fix it up in the final patch.
Anton, can you get the SFS guys to check with the patch below. It
reverts your patch, but then replaces the old check against r1 with a
check against PACAKSAVE - assuming I haven't missed some corner case,
I think this is a better fix.
David.
Index: working-2.6/arch/ppc64/mm/slb_low.S
===================================================================
--- working-2.6.orig/arch/ppc64/mm/slb_low.S 2004-08-10 11:14:24.000000000 +1000
+++ working-2.6/arch/ppc64/mm/slb_low.S 2004-08-10 11:50:55.343025496 +1000
@@ -36,7 +36,15 @@
* First find a slot, round robin. Previously we tried to find
* a free slot first but that took too long. Unfortunately we
* dont have any LRU information to help us choose a slot.
+ *
+ * Use paca->ksave as the address of the kernel stack, because
+ * if we're on an interrupt stack, checking against r1 could
+ * let us throw out the real kernel stack.
*/
+ ld r9,PACAKSAVE(r13)
+ srdi r9,r9,27
+ ori r9,r9,1 /* mangle SP for later compare */
+
ld r10,PACASTABRR(r13)
3:
addi r10,r10,1
@@ -45,32 +53,18 @@
blt+ 4f
li r10,SLB_NUM_BOLTED
-
- /*
- * Never cast out the segment for our kernel stack. Since we
+4:
+ slbmfee r11,r10
+ /* Don't throw out the segment for our kernel stack. Since we
* dont invalidate the ERAT we could have a valid translation
- * for the kernel stack during the first part of exception exit
- * which gets invalidated due to a tlbie from another cpu at a
- * non recoverable point (after setting srr0/1) - Anton
- */
-4: slbmfee r11,r10
- srdi r11,r11,27
- /*
- * Use paca->ksave as the value of the kernel stack pointer,
- * because this is valid at all times.
+ * for the kernel stack during the first part of exception
+ * exit which gets invalidated due to a tlbie from another cpu
+ * at a non recoverable point (after setting srr0/1) - Anton
+ *
* The >> 27 (rather than >> 28) is so that the LSB is the
* valid bit - this way we check valid and ESID in one compare.
- * In order to completely close the tiny race in the context
- * switch (between updating r1 and updating paca->ksave),
- * we check against both r1 and paca->ksave.
*/
- srdi r9,r1,27
- ori r9,r9,1 /* mangle SP for later compare */
- cmpd r11,r9
- beq- 3b
- ld r9,PACAKSAVE(r13)
- srdi r9,r9,27
- ori r9,r9,1
+ srdi r11,r11,27
cmpd r11,r9
beq- 3b
--
David Gibson | For every complex problem there is a
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | solution which is simple, neat and
| wrong.
http://www.ozlabs.org/people/dgibson
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread