From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Veronika kabatova <vkabatov@redhat.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ACPI: osl: Add __force attribute in acpi_os_map_iomem() cast
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 12:40:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXEB1CFj1svCWu7yOoUi_OkEqYEUQnB_XWOd3gD+ejO_6w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YRKtEDycefrZLB3X@infradead.org>
On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 18:46, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 04:23:57PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > Add a __force attribute to the void* cast in acpi_os_map_iomem()
> > to prevent sparse warnings.
>
> Err, no. These annotation are there for a reason and need to
> be propagated instead. And independent of that a __force cast
> without a comment explaining it is a complete no-go.
The whole problem we are solving here is that ACPI, being based on
x86, conflates MMIO mappings with memory mappings, and has been using
the same underlying infrastructure for either. On arm64, this is not
sufficient, given that the semantics of uncached memory vs device are
different (the former permits unaligned accesses and clear cacheline
instructions, but the latter doesn't). A recent optimization applied
to memcpy() on arm64 (which now relies more on unaligned accesses for
performance) has uncovered an issue where firmware tables being mapped
non-cacheable by the ACPI core will end up using device mappings,
which causes memcpy() to choke on their contents.
So propagating the annotation makes no sense, as we are creating a
memory mapping using the iomem primitive. I wouldn't object to a
comment being added, but I think the context should have been obvious
to anyone who had bothered to look at the entire series.
_______________________________________________
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:[~2021-08-11 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-26 10:00 [PATCH] ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory() Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-07-26 15:55 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-07-27 10:06 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-07-27 10:09 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-07-27 16:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-07-27 4:21 ` Hanjun Guo
2021-08-02 15:23 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] ACPI: Fix acpi_os_map_memory() memory semantics Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-02 15:37 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-08-23 10:46 ` [PATCH RESEND v3] ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory() Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-23 12:30 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-08-25 17:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-08-02 15:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] ACPI: osl: Add __force attribute in acpi_os_map_iomem() cast Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-10 16:45 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-11 10:40 ` Ard Biesheuvel [this message]
2021-08-11 14:01 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-11 14:08 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-11 14:55 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-16 9:58 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-16 10:21 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-08-16 10:59 ` Robin Murphy
2021-08-16 13:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2021-08-02 15:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ACPI: osl: Reorder acpi_os_map_iomem() __ref annotation Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-02 15:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ACPI: Add memory semantics to acpi_os_map_memory() Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-02 16:46 ` Catalin Marinas
2021-08-03 9:16 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-08-05 19:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
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=CAMj1kXEB1CFj1svCWu7yOoUi_OkEqYEUQnB_XWOd3gD+ejO_6w@mail.gmail.com \
--to=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=vkabatov@redhat.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).