| Message ID | 20211028141938.3530-12-lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Kconfig symbol clean-up on ./arch/arm{64} | expand |
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > There is no and never was a Kconfig for ARM_ERRATA_794072 in the kernel > tree. So, there is no need to select ARM_ERRATA_794072 in > ./arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig. > > Simply drop selecting the non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > This issue was discovered with ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py. > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> > --- Could this be a typo? Maybe we need to enable a different errata workaround here, or maybe that code is actually needed and has to get sent. Arnd
On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 14:57, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > There is no and never was a Kconfig for ARM_ERRATA_794072 in the kernel > > tree. So, there is no need to select ARM_ERRATA_794072 in > > ./arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig. > > > > Simply drop selecting the non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > This issue was discovered with ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> > > --- > > Could this be a typo? Maybe we need to enable a different errata workaround > here, or maybe that code is actually needed and has to get sent. Doing some searching, u-boot had a workaround for something called ARM_ERRATA_794072. https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/commit/f71cbfe3ca5d2ad20159871700e8e248c8818ba8 Lore has the review history for that patch: https://lore.kernel.org/all/6be32e0b5b454ed7b609317266a8e798@BLUPR03MB358.namprd03.prod.outlook.com/ It looks like it's the same workaround as ARM_ERRATA_742230, which the kernel does implement. It would be good to hear from the Nuvoton people, or an Arm person. Cheers, Joel
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:36 AM Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 14:57, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > There is no and never was a Kconfig for ARM_ERRATA_794072 in the kernel > > > tree. So, there is no need to select ARM_ERRATA_794072 in > > > ./arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig. > > > > > > Simply drop selecting the non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > > > This issue was discovered with ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > > Could this be a typo? Maybe we need to enable a different errata workaround > > here, or maybe that code is actually needed and has to get sent. > > Doing some searching, u-boot had a workaround for something called > ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/commit/f71cbfe3ca5d2ad20159871700e8e248c8818ba8 > > Lore has the review history for that patch: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/6be32e0b5b454ed7b609317266a8e798@BLUPR03MB358.namprd03.prod.outlook.com/ > > It looks like it's the same workaround as ARM_ERRATA_742230, which the > kernel does implement. > > It would be good to hear from the Nuvoton people, or an Arm person. > I will happily update the patch to select ARM_ERRATA_742230 instead of the dead non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. In contrast to the current patch that basically only cleans up "dead config" and has no effective functional change, the new patch would change the behaviour. I cannot test this patch (beyond some basic compile test) on the hardware; so, we certainly need someone to have that hardware, knows how to test it or confirm otherwise that we should select the ARM_ERRATA_742230 fix for this hardware. The current patch should be subsumed by the new patch; the submission of the new patch is deferred until that person shows up. Let's see. Lukas
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 8:31 AM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:36 AM Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 14:57, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/6be32e0b5b454ed7b609317266a8e798@BLUPR03MB358.namprd03.prod.outlook.com/ > > > > It looks like it's the same workaround as ARM_ERRATA_742230, which the > > kernel does implement. > > > > It would be good to hear from the Nuvoton people, or an Arm person. > > I will happily update the patch to select ARM_ERRATA_742230 instead of > the dead non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > In contrast to the current patch that basically only cleans up "dead > config" and has no effective functional change, the new patch would > change the behaviour. I cannot test this patch (beyond some basic > compile test) on the hardware; so, we certainly need someone to have > that hardware, knows how to test it or confirm otherwise that we > should select the ARM_ERRATA_742230 fix for this hardware. > > The current patch should be subsumed by the new patch; the submission > of the new patch is deferred until that person shows up. Let's see. I'd prefer to leave the broken Kconfig symbol in place as a reminder until it gets fixed properly then. Arnd
Hi, At Nuvoton we implied this WA in the past, not because we encountered a specific problem but since the errata says so and we saw this in other patches like: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/1396298072-13254-2-git-send-email-nitin.garg@freescale.com/ But we didn't upstream the arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S From the errata document. "794072 A short loop including a DMB instruction might cause a denial of service on another processor which executes a CP15 broadcast operation Status Affects: Fault Type: Fault Status: Cortex-A9 MPCore. Programmer Category B Present in: All r1, r2, r3 and r4 revisions Open Description A processor which continuously executes a short loop containing a DMB instruction might prevent a CP15 operation broadcast by another processor making further progress, causing a denial of service. Configurations affected This erratum affects all Cortex-A9 MPCore processors with two or more processors. Conditions The erratum requires the following conditions: - Two or more processors are working in SMP mode (ACTLR.SMP=1) - One of the processors continuously executes a short loop containing at least one DMB instruction. - Another processor executes a CP15 maintenance operation that is broadcast. This requires that this processor has enabled the broadcasting of CP15 operations (ACTLR.FW=1) For the erratum to occur, the short loop containing the DMB instruction must meet all of the following additional conditions: - No more than 10 instructions other than the DMB are executed between each DMB - No non-conditional Load or Store, or conditional Load or Store which pass the condition code check, are executed between each DMB When all the conditions for the erratum are met, the short loop creates a continuous stream of DMB instructions. This might cause a denial of service, by preventing the processor executing the short loop from executing the received broadcast CP15 operation. As a result, the processor that originally executed the broadcast CP15 operation is stalled until the execution of the loop is interrupted. Note that because the process issuing the CP15 broadcast operation cannot complete operation, it cannot enter any debug-mode, and cannot take any interrupt. If the processor executing the short loop also cannot be interrupted, for example if it has disabled its interrupts, or if no interrupts are routed to this processor, this erratum might cause a system livelock. Implications The erratum might create performance issues, or in the worst case it might cause a system livelock if the processor executing the DMB is in an infinite loop that cannot be interrupted. Workaround This erratum can be worked round by setting bit[4] of the undocumented Diagnostic Control Register to 1. This register is encoded as CP15 c15 0 c0 1. This bit can be written in Secure state only, with the following Read/Modify/Write code sequence: MRC p15,0,rt,c15,c0,1 ORR rt,rt,#0x10 MCR p15,0,rt,c15,c0,1 When it is set, this bit causes the DMB instruction to be decoded and executed like a DSB. Using this software workaround is not expected to have any impact on the overall performance of the processor on a typical code base. Other workarounds are also available for this erratum, to either prevent or interrupt the continuous stream of DMB instructions that causes the deadlock. For example: - Inserting a non-conditional Load or Store instruction in the loop between each DMB - Inserting additional instructions in the loop, such as NOPs, to avoid the processor seeing back to back DMB instructions. - Making the processor executing the short loop take regular interrupts." Avi On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:31 AM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:36 AM Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 14:57, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > There is no and never was a Kconfig for ARM_ERRATA_794072 in the kernel > > > > tree. So, there is no need to select ARM_ERRATA_794072 in > > > > ./arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig. > > > > > > > > Simply drop selecting the non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > > > > > This issue was discovered with ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > > > Could this be a typo? Maybe we need to enable a different errata workaround > > > here, or maybe that code is actually needed and has to get sent. > > > > Doing some searching, u-boot had a workaround for something called > > ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/commit/f71cbfe3ca5d2ad20159871700e8e248c8818ba8 > > > > Lore has the review history for that patch: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/6be32e0b5b454ed7b609317266a8e798@BLUPR03MB358.namprd03.prod.outlook.com/ > > > > It looks like it's the same workaround as ARM_ERRATA_742230, which the > > kernel does implement. > > > > It would be good to hear from the Nuvoton people, or an Arm person. > > > > I will happily update the patch to select ARM_ERRATA_742230 instead of > the dead non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > In contrast to the current patch that basically only cleans up "dead > config" and has no effective functional change, the new patch would > change the behaviour. I cannot test this patch (beyond some basic > compile test) on the hardware; so, we certainly need someone to have > that hardware, knows how to test it or confirm otherwise that we > should select the ARM_ERRATA_742230 fix for this hardware. > > The current patch should be subsumed by the new patch; the submission > of the new patch is deferred until that person shows up. Let's see. > > Lukas
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 10:22 AM Avi Fishman <avifishman70@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > At Nuvoton we implied this WA in the past, not because we encountered > a specific problem but since the errata says so and we saw this in > other patches like: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-kernel/patch/1396298072-13254-2-git-send-email-nitin.garg@freescale.com/ > But we didn't upstream the arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S > > From the errata document. > "794072 A short loop including a DMB instruction might cause a denial > of service on > another processor which executes a CP15 broadcast operation > Status > Affects: > Fault Type: > Fault Status: Cortex-A9 MPCore. > Programmer Category B > Present in: All r1, r2, r3 and r4 revisions Open > Description > A processor which continuously executes a short loop containing a DMB > instruction might prevent a CP15 > operation broadcast by another processor making further progress, > causing a denial of service. > Configurations affected > This erratum affects all Cortex-A9 MPCore processors with two or more > processors. > Conditions > The erratum requires the following conditions: > - Two or more processors are working in SMP mode (ACTLR.SMP=1) > - One of the processors continuously executes a short loop containing > at least one DMB instruction. > - Another processor executes a CP15 maintenance operation that is > broadcast. This requires that this > processor has enabled the broadcasting of CP15 operations (ACTLR.FW=1) > For the erratum to occur, the short loop containing the DMB > instruction must meet all of the following additional > conditions: > - No more than 10 instructions other than the DMB are executed between each DMB > - No non-conditional Load or Store, or conditional Load or Store which > pass the condition code check, are > executed between each DMB > When all the conditions for the erratum are met, the short loop > creates a continuous stream of DMB instructions. > This might cause a denial of service, by preventing the processor > executing the short loop from executing the > received broadcast CP15 operation. As a result, the processor that > originally executed the broadcast CP15 > operation is stalled until the execution of the loop is interrupted. > Note that because the process issuing the CP15 broadcast operation > cannot complete operation, it cannot enter > any debug-mode, and cannot take any interrupt. If the processor > executing the short loop also cannot be > interrupted, for example if it has disabled its interrupts, or if no > interrupts are routed to this processor, this > erratum might cause a system livelock. > Implications > The erratum might create performance issues, or in the worst case it > might cause a system livelock if the > processor executing the DMB is in an infinite loop that cannot be interrupted. > Workaround > This erratum can be worked round by setting bit[4] of the undocumented > Diagnostic Control Register to 1. This > register is encoded as CP15 c15 0 c0 1. > This bit can be written in Secure state only, with the following > Read/Modify/Write code sequence: > MRC p15,0,rt,c15,c0,1 > ORR rt,rt,#0x10 > MCR p15,0,rt,c15,c0,1 > When it is set, this bit causes the DMB instruction to be decoded and > executed like a DSB. > Using this software workaround is not expected to have any impact on > the overall performance of the processor > on a typical code base. > Other workarounds are also available for this erratum, to either > prevent or interrupt the continuous stream of > DMB instructions that causes the deadlock. For example: > - Inserting a non-conditional Load or Store instruction in the loop > between each DMB > - Inserting additional instructions in the loop, such as NOPs, to > avoid the processor seeing back to back > DMB instructions. > - Making the processor executing the short loop take regular interrupts." > > Avi > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:31 AM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:36 AM Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 14:57, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > There is no and never was a Kconfig for ARM_ERRATA_794072 in the kernel > > > > > tree. So, there is no need to select ARM_ERRATA_794072 in > > > > > ./arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig. > > > > > > > > > > Simply drop selecting the non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > > > > > > > This issue was discovered with ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Could this be a typo? Maybe we need to enable a different errata workaround > > > > here, or maybe that code is actually needed and has to get sent. > > > > > > Doing some searching, u-boot had a workaround for something called > > > ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > > > https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/commit/f71cbfe3ca5d2ad20159871700e8e248c8818ba8 > > > > > > Lore has the review history for that patch: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/6be32e0b5b454ed7b609317266a8e798@BLUPR03MB358.namprd03.prod.outlook.com/ > > > > > > It looks like it's the same workaround as ARM_ERRATA_742230, which the > > > kernel does implement. > > > > > > It would be good to hear from the Nuvoton people, or an Arm person. > > > > > > > I will happily update the patch to select ARM_ERRATA_742230 instead of > > the dead non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > In contrast to the current patch that basically only cleans up "dead > > config" and has no effective functional change, the new patch would > > change the behaviour. I cannot test this patch (beyond some basic > > compile test) on the hardware; so, we certainly need someone to have > > that hardware, knows how to test it or confirm otherwise that we > > should select the ARM_ERRATA_742230 fix for this hardware. Note that ARM_ERRATA_742230 is applied in code up-to CORTEX-A9 r2p2 but while ARM_ERRATA_794072 exist also in CORTEX-A9 r4p1 https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/322a3b843d7f475b857646ed8f95b40431d3ecd0/arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S#L347 > > > > The current patch should be subsumed by the new patch; the submission > > of the new patch is deferred until that person shows up. Let's see. > > > > Lukas > > > > -- > Regards, > Avi
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 9:11 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 8:31 AM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:36 AM Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote: > > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 14:57, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 4:19 PM Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/6be32e0b5b454ed7b609317266a8e798@BLUPR03MB358.namprd03.prod.outlook.com/ > > > > > > It looks like it's the same workaround as ARM_ERRATA_742230, which the > > > kernel does implement. > > > > > > It would be good to hear from the Nuvoton people, or an Arm person. > > > > I will happily update the patch to select ARM_ERRATA_742230 instead of > > the dead non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. > > > > In contrast to the current patch that basically only cleans up "dead > > config" and has no effective functional change, the new patch would > > change the behaviour. I cannot test this patch (beyond some basic > > compile test) on the hardware; so, we certainly need someone to have > > that hardware, knows how to test it or confirm otherwise that we > > should select the ARM_ERRATA_742230 fix for this hardware. > > > > The current patch should be subsumed by the new patch; the submission > > of the new patch is deferred until that person shows up. Let's see. > > I'd prefer to leave the broken Kconfig symbol in place as a reminder until it > gets fixed properly then. > Agree, this patch here should not be integrated. I rather expect that Avi or others at Nuvoton will provide a proper patch to act appropriately for the ARM_ERRATA_794072, or after proper analysis can determine that there is no change in the kernel required. Lukas
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig b/arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig index a71cf1d189ae..9c137462fbe4 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig @@ -30,7 +30,6 @@ config ARCH_NPCM7XX select ARM_ERRATA_764369 if SMP select ARM_ERRATA_720789 select ARM_ERRATA_754322 - select ARM_ERRATA_794072 select PL310_ERRATA_588369 select PL310_ERRATA_727915 select MFD_SYSCON
There is no and never was a Kconfig for ARM_ERRATA_794072 in the kernel tree. So, there is no need to select ARM_ERRATA_794072 in ./arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig. Simply drop selecting the non-existing ARM_ERRATA_794072. This issue was discovered with ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py. Signed-off-by: Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/mach-npcm/Kconfig | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)