Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v6 07/24] arm64: Make PMR part of task context | From | Julien Thierry <> | Date | Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:30:53 +0000 |
| |
On 04/12/18 17:09, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 11:56:58AM +0000, Julien Thierry wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S >> index 039144e..eb8120e 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/entry.S >> @@ -249,6 +249,12 @@ alternative_else_nop_endif >> msr sp_el0, tsk >> .endif >> >> + /* Save pmr */ >> +alternative_if ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING >> + mrs_s x20, SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1 >> + str x20, [sp, #S_PMR_SAVE] >> +alternative_else_nop_endif >> + >> /* >> * Registers that may be useful after this macro is invoked: >> * >> @@ -269,6 +275,13 @@ alternative_else_nop_endif >> /* No need to restore UAO, it will be restored from SPSR_EL1 */ >> .endif >> >> + /* Restore pmr */ >> +alternative_if ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING >> + ldr x20, [sp, #S_PMR_SAVE] >> + msr_s SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1, x20 >> + dsb sy >> +alternative_else_nop_endif > > What's this DSB for? If it's needed, please add a comment. >
The DSB is to make sure that, in the case we are unmasking interrupt priorities, the unmasking is seen by the redistributor. Without it the redistributor might only start forwarding interrupts (if their priorities are too low) to the CPU once it has seen that PMR was modified, which could happen after the CPU has returned from the exception.
I'll add a comment.
> I would have expected an ISB (or none at all as we are going to return > from an exception).
So the two reasons we don't need an ISB are: - the only thing that matter is that PMR modification + DSB happens before exception return - writes to ICC_PMR_EL1 are self synchronizing so we don't need an ISB before the DSB
Thanks,
-- Julien Thierry
| |