Il 16/09/2014 04:06, Andrew Jones ha scritto:
> We shouldn't try Load-Exclusive instructions unless we've enabled memory
> management, as these instructions depend on the data cache unit's
> coherency monitor. This patch adds a new setup boolean, initialized to false,
> that is used to guard Load-Exclusive instructions. Eventually we'll add more
> setup code that sets it true.
>
> Note: This problem became visible on boards with Cortex-A7 processors. Testing
> with Cortex-A15 didn't expose it, as those may have an external coherency
> monitor that still allows the instruction to execute (on A7s we got data
> aborts). Although even on A15's it's not clear from the spec if the
> instructions will behave as expected while caches are off, so we no longer
> allow Load-Exclusive instructions on those processors without caches enabled
> either.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <[email protected]>
> ---
> lib/arm/asm/setup.h | 2 ++
> lib/arm/setup.c | 1 +
> lib/arm/spinlock.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/arm/asm/setup.h b/lib/arm/asm/setup.h
> index 21445ef2085fc..9c54c184e2866 100644
> --- a/lib/arm/asm/setup.h
> +++ b/lib/arm/asm/setup.h
> @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ extern phys_addr_t __phys_offset, __phys_end;
> #define PHYS_SIZE (1ULL << PHYS_SHIFT)
> #define PHYS_MASK (PHYS_SIZE - 1ULL)
>
> +extern bool mem_caches_enabled;
> +
> #define L1_CACHE_SHIFT 6
> #define L1_CACHE_BYTES (1 << L1_CACHE_SHIFT)
> #define SMP_CACHE_BYTES L1_CACHE_BYTES
> diff --git a/lib/arm/setup.c b/lib/arm/setup.c
> index 3941c9757dcb2..f7ed639c9d499 100644
> --- a/lib/arm/setup.c
> +++ b/lib/arm/setup.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ u32 cpus[NR_CPUS] = { [0 ... NR_CPUS-1] = (~0UL) };
> int nr_cpus;
>
> phys_addr_t __phys_offset, __phys_end;
> +bool mem_caches_enabled;
>
> static void cpu_set(int fdtnode __unused, u32 regval, void *info __unused)
> {
> diff --git a/lib/arm/spinlock.c b/lib/arm/spinlock.c
> index d8a6d4c3383d6..43539c5e84062 100644
> --- a/lib/arm/spinlock.c
> +++ b/lib/arm/spinlock.c
> @@ -1,12 +1,22 @@
> #include "libcflat.h"
> #include "asm/spinlock.h"
> #include "asm/barrier.h"
> +#include "asm/setup.h"
>
> void spin_lock(struct spinlock *lock)
> {
> u32 val, fail;
>
> dmb();
> +
> + /*
> + * Without caches enabled Load-Exclusive instructions may fail.
> + * In that case we do nothing, and just hope the caller knows
> + * what they're doing.
> + */
> + if (!mem_caches_enabled)
> + return;
Should it at least write 1 to the spinlock?
Paolo
> do {
> asm volatile(
> "1: ldrex %0, [%2]\n"
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
