public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, hpa@zytor.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk,
	matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
	will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/5] efi/runtime-wrappers: add {__,}efi_call_virt templates
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 12:42:56 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160421114256.GP2904@bivouac.eciton.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1461238529-12810-2-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 12:35:25PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Currently each architecture must implement two macros, efi_call_virt and
> __efi_call_virt, which only differ by the presence or absence of a
> return type. Otherwise, the logic surrounding the call is identical.
> 
> As each architecture must define the entire body of each, we can't place
> any generic manipulation (e.g. irq flag validation) in the middle.
> 
> This patch adds template implementations of these macros. With these,
> arch code can implement three template macros, avoiding reptition for
> the void/non-void return cases:
> 
> * arch_efi_call_virt_setup
> 
>   Sets up the environment for the call (e.g. switching page tables,
>   allowing kernel-mode use of floating point, if required).
> 
> * arch_efi_call_virt
> 
>   Performs the call. The last expression in the macro must be the call
>   itself, allowing the logic to be shared by the void and non-void
>   cases.
> 
> * arch_efi_call_virt_teardown
> 
>   Restores the usual kernel environment once the call has returned.
> 
> While the savings from repition are minimal, we additionally gain the
> ability to add common code around the call with the call enviroment set
> up. This can be used to detect common firmware issues (e.g. bad irq mask
> management).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
> Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
> index de69530..1b9fa54 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/runtime-wrappers.c
> @@ -20,6 +20,27 @@
>  #include <linux/spinlock.h>
>  #include <asm/efi.h>
>  
> +
> +#ifndef efi_call_virt

So ... not a strong complaint, but I would prefer if these weren't
ifdefd. I presume this is because ia64?
Could that be given a dummy pass-through version instead? If not,
could a comment be added that this is to retain compatibility with
ia64 (so that if that architecture was to mysteriously disappear from
the tree, someone might remember to deconditionalise it)?

> +#define efi_call_virt(f, args...)					\
> +({									\
> +	efi_status_t __s;						\
> +	arch_efi_call_virt_setup();					\
> +	__s = arch_efi_call_virt(f, args);				\
> +	arch_efi_call_virt_teardown();					\
> +	__s;								\
> +})
> +#endif
> +
> +#ifndef __efi_call_virt
> +#define __efi_call_virt(f, args...)					\
> +({									\
> +	arch_efi_call_virt_setup();					\
> +	arch_efi_call_virt(f, args);					\
> +	arch_efi_call_virt_teardown();					\
> +})
> +#endif
> +
>  /*
>   * According to section 7.1 of the UEFI spec, Runtime Services are not fully
>   * reentrant, and there are particular combinations of calls that need to be
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-21 11:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1461238529-12810-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>
2016-04-21 11:35 ` [PATCHv2 1/5] efi/runtime-wrappers: add {__,}efi_call_virt templates Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 11:42   ` Leif Lindholm [this message]
2016-04-21 12:55     ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 14:19       ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 11:35 ` [PATCHv2 2/5] arm64/efi: move to generic {__,}efi_call_virt Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 16:48   ` Will Deacon
2016-04-21 16:58     ` Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 11:35 ` [PATCHv2 3/5] arm/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 11:35 ` [PATCHv2 4/5] x86/efi: " Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 11:35 ` [PATCHv2 5/5] efi/runtime-wrappers: detect FW irq flag corruption Mark Rutland
2016-04-21 17:05   ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-21 17:18     ` Mark Rutland

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=20160421114256.GP2904@bivouac.eciton.net \
    --to=leif.lindholm@linaro.org \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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