Re: [PATCH 3.17-rc4 v7 4/6] irqchip: gic: Add support for IPI FIQ

[Marc Zyngier]

On Wed, Sep 17 2014 at 07:51:38 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Russell,

> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 09:10:16AM -0700, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> This patch provides support for arm's newly added IPI FIQ. It works
>> by placing all interrupt sources *except* IPI FIQ in group 1 and
>> then flips a configuration bit in the GIC such that group 1
>> interrupts use IRQ and group 0 interrupts use FIQ.
>>
>> All GIC hardware except GICv1-without-TrustZone support provides a means
>> to group exceptions into group 0 and group 1. However the hardware
>> functionality is unavailable to the kernel when a secure monitor is
>> present because access to the grouping registers are prohibited outside
>> "secure world" (a feature that allows grouping to be used to allow
>> hardware peripherals to send interrupts into the secure world). However
>> when grouping is not available we can rely on the GIC's RAZ/WI semantics
>> and avoid conditional code.
>
> I've been chasing a bug with this on the Versatile Express CT9x4.  It
> seems that the GIC there is a GICv1, with secure extensions.  It seems
> to support interrupt grouping.
>
> However, setting SPIs to group 1, with the control registers enabling
> both group 0 and group 1 (such that both groups are treated as IRQs)
> results in no SPIs being delivered to the kernel.  In other words,
> setting GIC_DIST_IGROUP for SPIs, and setting both GIC_CPU_CTRL and
> GIC_DIST_CTRL to 3.
>
> This is rather worrying, because we seem to have a GIC which for all
> intents and purposes appears to be compatible with what we want to do,
> appears to conform with the GIC architecture specifications, but doesn't
> actually work.
>
> I suspect that running the Versatile Express CT9x4 in non-secure mode
> wouldn't work (because in non-secure mode, the GIC only allows access
> to group 1 interrupts.)
>
> I've added Will and Mark to this to see whether they have any comment.

I'm rather far away from my VE-A9 board (and won't be to get back to it
for another two weeks), so this is all a shot in the dark...

Can you have a look at the GICC_AIAR register (located at GICC_IAR +
0x14)? It *shouldn't* exist on this HW, assuming this is a real
GICv1. But what you describe makes me think of something like this.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/