From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org>,
rnayak@codeaurora.org, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jeremy.linton@arm.com, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, andrew.murray@arm.com,
will@kernel.org, Dave.Martin@arm.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Relax CPU features sanity checking on heterogeneous architectures
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 14:54:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191011135431.GB33537@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191011143343.541da66c@why>
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:33:43PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:50:11 +0100
> Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 11:19:00AM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
> > > On latest QCOM SoCs like SM8150 and SC7180 with big.LITTLE arch, below
> > > warnings are observed during bootup of big cpu cores.
> >
> > For reference, which CPUs are in those SoCs?
> >
> > > SM8150:
> > >
> > > [ 0.271177] CPU features: SANITY CHECK: Unexpected variation in
> > > SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1. Boot CPU: 0x00000011112222, CPU4: 0x00000011111112
> >
> > The differing fields are EL3, EL2, and EL1: the boot CPU supports
> > AArch64 and AArch32 at those exception levels, while the secondary only
> > supports AArch64.
> >
> > Do we handle this variation in KVM?
>
> We do, at least at vcpu creation time (see kvm_reset_vcpu). But if one
> of the !AArch32 CPU comes in late in the game (after we've started a
> guest), all bets are off (we'll schedule the 32bit guest on that CPU,
> enter the guest, immediately take an Illegal Exception Return, and
> return to userspace with KVM_EXIT_FAIL_ENTRY).
Ouch. We certainly can't remove the warning untill we deal with that
somehow, then.
> Not sure we could do better, given the HW. My preference would be to
> fail these CPUs if they aren't present at boot time.
I agree; I think we need logic to check the ID register fields against
their EXACT, {LOWER,HIGHER}_SAFE, etc rules regardless of whether we
have an associated cap. That can then abort a late onlining of a CPU
which violates those rules w.r.t. the finalised system value.
I suspect that we may want to split the notion of
safe-for-{user,kernel-guest} in the feature tables, as if nothing else
it will force us to consider those cases separately when adding new
stuff.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-11 13:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-11 5:49 Relax CPU features sanity checking on heterogeneous architectures Sai Prakash Ranjan
2019-10-11 9:19 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-10-11 9:57 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2019-10-11 10:50 ` Mark Rutland
2019-10-11 11:09 ` Marc Gonzalez
2019-10-11 13:33 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2019-10-11 13:17 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2019-10-11 13:34 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-11 13:40 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2019-10-17 20:00 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-18 7:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-18 14:33 ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-18 16:40 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-18 10:18 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
2019-10-11 13:33 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-11 13:54 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2019-10-11 14:06 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-10-17 21:39 ` Jeremy Linton
2019-10-18 9:01 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-01-20 2:47 ` Sai Prakash Ranjan
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=20191011135431.GB33537@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=andrew.murray@arm.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=rnayak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=saiprakash.ranjan@codeaurora.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.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).