On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 04:57:32PM +0000, Julien Thierry wrote:
> On 18/01/2019 16:09, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 02:07:30PM +0000, Julien Thierry wrote:
> >> + asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> >> + "nop",
> >> + "mrs_s %0, " __stringify(SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1),
> >> + ARM64_HAS_IRQ_PRIO_MASKING)
> >> + : "=&r" (pmr)
> >> :
> >> : "memory");
> >> +
> >> + return _get_irqflags(daif_bits, pmr);
> >> +}
> >
> > I find this confusing spread over two inline asm statements. IIUC, you
> > want something like below (it could be written as inline asm but I need
> > to understand it first):
> >
> > daif_bits = read_sysreg(daif);
> >
> > if (system_uses_irq_prio_masking()) {
> > pmr = read_gicreg(ICC_PMR_EL1);
> > flags = pmr & ~(daif_bits & PSR_I_BIT);
> > } else {
> > flags = daif_bits;
> > }
> >
> > return flags;
> >
> > In the case where the interrupts are disabled at the PSR level, is the
> > PMR value still relevant? Could we just return the GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF?
> > Something like:
> >
> > flags = read_sysreg(daif);
> >
> > if (system_uses_irq_prio_masking())
> > flags = flags & PSR_I_BIT ?
> > GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF : read_gicreg(ICC_PMR_EL1);
> >
>
> You're right, returning GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF should be good enough (it is
> actually what happens in this version because GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF ==
> GIC_PRIO_IRQON & ~PSR_I_BIT happens to be true).
This wasn't entirely clear to me, I got confused by:
+ BUILD_BUG_ON(GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF < (GIC_PRIO_IRQON & ~PSR_I_BIT)); \
and I thought there isn't necessarily an equality between the two.
> Your suggestion would
> make things easier to reason about. Maybe something like:
>
>
> static inline unsigned long arch_local_save_flags(void)
> {
> unsigned long daif_bits;
> unsigned long prio_off = GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF;
>
> daif_bits = read_sysreg(daif);
>
> asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
> "mov %0, %1\n"
> "nop\n"
> "nop",
> "mrs %0, SYS_ICC_PMR_EL1\n"
> "ands %1, %1, PSR_I_BIT\n"
> "csel %0, %0, %2, eq")
> : "=&r" (flags)
> : "r" (daif_bits), "r" (prio_off)
> : "memory");
>
> return flags;
> }
It looks fine. If you turn the BUILD_BUG_ON into a !=, you could
probably simplify the asm a bit (though the number of instructions
generated would probably be the same). Untested:
static inline unsigned long arch_local_save_flags(void)
{
unsigned long flags;
flags = read_sysreg(daif);
asm volatile(ALTERNATIVE(
"nop",
"bic %0, %1, %2")
: "=&r" (flags)
: "r" (flags & PSR_I_BIT), "r" (GIC_PRIO_IRQOFF)
: "memory");
return flags;
}
--
Catalin
