From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
To: Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH kvm-unit-tests] arm: Add PL031 test
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2019 15:25:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <212cc76d-0d67-cb75-5f7f-d707778bbeff@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190710132724.28350-1-graf@amazon.com>
Hi Alex,
I don't know much about pl031, so my comments are pretty general...
On 10/07/2019 14:27, Alexander Graf wrote:
> This patch adds a unit test for the PL031 RTC that is used in the virt machine.
> It just pokes basic functionality. I've mostly written it to familiarize myself
> with the device, but I suppose having the test around does not hurt, as it also
> exercises the GIC SPI interrupt path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>
> ---
> arm/Makefile.common | 1 +
> arm/pl031.c | 227 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> lib/arm/asm/gic.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 229 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 arm/pl031.c
>
> diff --git a/arm/Makefile.common b/arm/Makefile.common
> index f0c4b5d..b8988f2 100644
> --- a/arm/Makefile.common
> +++ b/arm/Makefile.common
> @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ tests-common += $(TEST_DIR)/pmu.flat
> tests-common += $(TEST_DIR)/gic.flat
> tests-common += $(TEST_DIR)/psci.flat
> tests-common += $(TEST_DIR)/sieve.flat
> +tests-common += $(TEST_DIR)/pl031.flat
>
> tests-all = $(tests-common) $(tests)
> all: directories $(tests-all)
> diff --git a/arm/pl031.c b/arm/pl031.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..a364a1a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arm/pl031.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@
> +/*
> + * Verify PL031 functionality
> + *
> + * This test verifies whether the emulated PL031 behaves correctly.
> + *
> + * Copyright 2019 Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
> + * Author: Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>
> + *
> + * This work is licensed under the terms of the GNU LGPL, version 2.
> + */
> +#include <libcflat.h>
> +#include <asm/processor.h>
> +#include <asm/io.h>
> +#include <asm/gic.h>
> +
> +static u32 cntfrq;
> +
> +#define PL031_BASE 0x09010000
> +#define PL031_IRQ 2
Does the unit test framework have a way to extract this from the firmware tables?
That'd be much nicer...
> +
> +struct pl031_regs {
> + uint32_t dr; /* Data Register */
> + uint32_t mr; /* Match Register */
> + uint32_t lr; /* Load Register */
> + union {
> + uint8_t cr; /* Control Register */
> + uint32_t cr32;
> + };
> + union {
> + uint8_t imsc; /* Interrupt Mask Set or Clear register */
> + uint32_t imsc32;
> + };
> + union {
> + uint8_t ris; /* Raw Interrupt Status */
> + uint32_t ris32;
> + };
> + union {
> + uint8_t mis; /* Masked Interrupt Status */
> + uint32_t mis32;
> + };
> + union {
> + uint8_t icr; /* Interrupt Clear Register */
> + uint32_t icr32;
> + };
> + uint32_t reserved[1008];
> + uint32_t periph_id[4];
> + uint32_t pcell_id[4];
> +};
> +
> +static struct pl031_regs *pl031 = (void*)PL031_BASE;
> +static void *gic_ispendr;
> +static void *gic_isenabler;
> +static bool irq_triggered;
> +
> +static int check_id(void)
> +{
> + uint32_t id[] = { 0x31, 0x10, 0x14, 0x00, 0x0d, 0xf0, 0x05, 0xb1 };
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(id); i++)
> + if (id[i] != readl(&pl031->periph_id[i]))
> + return 1;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int check_ro(void)
> +{
> + uint32_t offs[] = { offsetof(struct pl031_regs, ris),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, mis),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, periph_id[0]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, periph_id[1]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, periph_id[2]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, periph_id[3]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, pcell_id[0]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, pcell_id[1]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, pcell_id[2]),
> + offsetof(struct pl031_regs, pcell_id[3]) };
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(offs); i++) {
> + uint32_t before32;
> + uint16_t before16;
> + uint8_t before8;
> + void *addr = (void*)pl031 + offs[i];
> + uint32_t poison = 0xdeadbeefULL;
> +
> + before8 = readb(addr);
> + before16 = readw(addr);
> + before32 = readl(addr);
> +
> + writeb(poison, addr);
> + writew(poison, addr);
> + writel(poison, addr);
> +
> + if (before8 != readb(addr))
> + return 1;
> + if (before16 != readw(addr))
> + return 1;
> + if (before32 != readl(addr))
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int check_rtc_freq(void)
> +{
> + uint32_t seconds_to_wait = 2;
> + uint32_t before = readl(&pl031->dr);
> + uint64_t before_tick = read_sysreg(cntpct_el0);
Hmmm. See below.
> + uint64_t target_tick = before_tick + (cntfrq * seconds_to_wait);
> +
> + /* Wait for 2 seconds */
> + while (read_sysreg(cntpct_el0) < target_tick) ;
Careful here. The control dependency saves you, but in general we want
to guarantee some stronger ordering when it comes to the counter. The
Linux kernel has the following:
/*
* Ensure that reads of the counter are treated the same as memory reads
* for the purposes of ordering by subsequent memory barriers.
*
* This insanity brought to you by speculative system register reads,
* out-of-order memory accesses, sequence locks and Thomas Gleixner.
*
* http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2019-February/631195.html
*/
#define arch_counter_enforce_ordering(val) do { \
u64 tmp, _val = (val); \
\
asm volatile( \
" eor %0, %1, %1\n" \
" add %0, sp, %0\n" \
" ldr xzr, [%0]" \
: "=r" (tmp) : "r" (_val)); \
} while (0)
static __always_inline u64 __arch_counter_get_cntpct_stable(void)
{
u64 cnt;
isb();
cnt = arch_timer_reg_read_stable(cntpct_el0);
arch_counter_enforce_ordering(cnt);
return cnt;
}
The initial ISB prevents the counter read from being reordered with earlier
instructions, while the fake memory dependency enforces ordering with
subsequent memory accesses. You're welcome ;-).
> +
> + if (readl(&pl031->dr) != before + seconds_to_wait)
> + return 1;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static bool gic_irq_pending(void)
> +{
> + return readl(gic_ispendr + 4) & (1 << (SPI(PL031_IRQ) - 32));
nit: you may want to make the offset depend on the interrupt itself...
> +}
> +
> +static void gic_irq_unmask(void)
> +{
> + writel(1 << (SPI(PL031_IRQ) - 32), gic_isenabler + 4);
> +}
> +
> +static void irq_handler(struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + u32 irqstat = gic_read_iar();
GICv3 requires a DSB SY after reading IAR. Is that included in gic_read_iar()?
> + u32 irqnr = gic_iar_irqnr(irqstat);
> +
> + if (irqnr != GICC_INT_SPURIOUS)
> + gic_write_eoir(irqstat);
You can always EOI spurious. Are you guaranteed to be in EOImode==0?
If not, you'd need an extra write to DIR. Also, this needs an ISB
for GICv3.
> +
> + if (irqnr == SPI(PL031_IRQ)) {
> + report(" RTC RIS == 1", readl(&pl031->ris) == 1);
> + report(" RTC MIS == 1", readl(&pl031->mis) == 1);
> +
> + /* Writing any value should clear IRQ status */
> + writel(0x80000000ULL, &pl031->icr);
> +
> + report(" RTC RIS == 0", readl(&pl031->ris) == 0);
> + report(" RTC MIS == 0", readl(&pl031->mis) == 0);
> + irq_triggered = true;
> + } else {
> + report_info("Unexpected interrupt: %d\n", irqnr);
> + return;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +static int check_rtc_irq(void)
> +{
> + uint32_t seconds_to_wait = 1;
> + uint32_t before = readl(&pl031->dr);
> + uint64_t before_tick = read_sysreg(cntpct_el0);
Same problem as above.
> + uint64_t target_tick = before_tick + (cntfrq * (seconds_to_wait + 1));
> +
> + report_info("Checking IRQ trigger (MR)");
> +
> + irq_triggered = false;
> +
> + /* Fire IRQ in 1 second */
> + writel(before + seconds_to_wait, &pl031->mr);
> +
> + install_irq_handler(EL1H_IRQ, irq_handler);
> +
> + /* Wait until 2 seconds are over */
> + while (read_sysreg(cntpct_el0) < target_tick) ;
> +
> + report(" RTC IRQ not delivered without mask", !gic_irq_pending());
> +
> + /* Mask the IRQ so that it gets delivered */
> + writel(1, &pl031->imsc);
> + report(" RTC IRQ pending now", gic_irq_pending());
> +
> + /* Enable retrieval of IRQ */
> + gic_irq_unmask();
> + local_irq_enable();
> +
> + report(" IRQ triggered", irq_triggered);
> + report(" RTC IRQ not pending anymore", !gic_irq_pending());
> + if (!irq_triggered) {
> + report_info(" RTC RIS: %x", readl(&pl031->ris));
> + report_info(" RTC MIS: %x", readl(&pl031->mis));
> + report_info(" RTC IMSC: %x", readl(&pl031->imsc));
> + report_info(" GIC IRQs pending: %08x %08x", readl(gic_ispendr), readl(gic_ispendr + 4));
> + }
> +
> + local_irq_disable();
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static void rtc_irq_init(void)
> +{
> + gic_enable_defaults();
> +
> + switch (gic_version()) {
> + case 2:
> + gic_ispendr = gicv2_dist_base() + GICD_ISPENDR;
> + gic_isenabler = gicv2_dist_base() + GICD_ISENABLER;
> + break;
> + case 3:
> + gic_ispendr = gicv3_sgi_base() + GICD_ISPENDR;
> + gic_isenabler = gicv3_sgi_base() + GICD_ISENABLER;
This only points to SGIs and PPIs. How does it work on GICv3?
Let me guess: you haven't tested it... ;-)
> + break;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +int main(int argc, char **argv)
> +{
> + cntfrq = get_cntfrq();
> + rtc_irq_init();
> +
> + report("Periph/PCell IDs match", !check_id());
> + report("R/O fields are R/O", !check_ro());
> + report("RTC ticks at 1HZ", !check_rtc_freq());
> + report("RTC IRQ not pending yet", !gic_irq_pending());
> + check_rtc_irq();
> +
> + return report_summary();
> +}
> diff --git a/lib/arm/asm/gic.h b/lib/arm/asm/gic.h
> index f6dfb90..1fc10a0 100644
> --- a/lib/arm/asm/gic.h
> +++ b/lib/arm/asm/gic.h
> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@
> #include <asm/gic-v3.h>
>
> #define PPI(irq) ((irq) + 16)
> +#define SPI(irq) ((irq) + GIC_FIRST_SPI)
>
> #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> #include <asm/cpumask.h>
>
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-10 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-10 13:27 [PATCH kvm-unit-tests] arm: Add PL031 test Alexander Graf
2019-07-10 14:25 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2019-07-12 8:29 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-12 8:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-07-10 14:37 ` Alexandru Elisei
2019-07-10 17:02 ` Andre Przywara
2019-07-10 17:06 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-07-11 5:49 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-11 7:52 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-07-11 9:42 ` Andre Przywara
2019-07-11 9:52 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-07-11 9:59 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-11 8:51 ` Peter Maydell
2019-07-11 9:11 ` Alexander Graf
2019-07-11 9:13 ` Peter Maydell
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=212cc76d-0d67-cb75-5f7f-d707778bbeff@arm.com \
--to=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).