Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:d5a5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id gn37csp2585430pxb; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:41:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoPhtFNaeYLAzGWdcOlkoOJssW4GCNCH2S3RS0R3Gph90VCvwC+WzZOOANehkFaLJNvd50 X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d70b:b0:13d:f465:9ef1 with SMTP id w11-20020a170902d70b00b0013df4659ef1mr10508399ply.44.1633714912705; Fri, 08 Oct 2021 10:41:52 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1633714912; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=OuDyb0QSXMLjaeqDBi2PvFUhb1wza2hCCJtWyka3C4v2b9ZkzHaggRhDk0sRAsNSOv EJrBDkrWrlMCXVqBrMT/a3CExIqNMteoGO7jIRqpfmvK9hGA1C+jHFM/DzkKFza14jai wGqgKNdsSTisT5swVaLADsjePr9s4DlSblw8MHlgzSmVNqpp3CzECDgBMmkcOHFLEZ+u DFrPthlcE7tme57yN29Li7cSGy++lWQKQDda8NwFXvDRxaRWPYdIE9MkRaWCqZwZCukG bg2WQXTn/aJJxplpUaJzEBoS2FVVbt0pFmekcR3v00PnYBG+BUYkYtxdyQeISmTPOYXq d3AQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject; bh=7amnBOd8MXhhFG/6dA+KitNWN3u27hb7H/GM4+x40S4=; b=Ai8wEbQNa2YRnmWQ/TNKeZv0SviPeXqrOUNZT7sLN45gY0vZa2+LoBstazK5Lu0XwD eEOyDRLy8YEMLGG+zlSnCuOx6hbn3pAiIa+73aP8TiJpGhZx4jz7y1qHDxiG+KoxqQ2g cuiw99Fr6/tExE3+vWN6SEUiQphNfQ1sx47mvgqb1QTigT0vcnX91oS7GaDuBGxvmBgp vD5oI9WfxoxeSB4s7r+ve4XW4Ac5gLO+o9R8M+aOwqEuQndwEGALxOVZk1I3fePiIEU9 XIslofyCB/LAsOBPDZSAcjy+soycMKPi/nRB7fM8Mh6j4PQoekVyxU9GPeJ/DD4BSd+m f4Gg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id i19si2491209pgm.135.2021.10.08.10.41.39; Fri, 08 Oct 2021 10:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=arm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237798AbhJHRlc (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 8 Oct 2021 13:41:32 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:38432 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231217AbhJHRl3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Oct 2021 13:41:29 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E881063; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:39:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.196.26] (eglon.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.26]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A7103F766; Fri, 8 Oct 2021 10:39:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_sdei: pass sdei_api_event_register right parameters To: Liguang Zhang Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20210910040117.98736-1-zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com> From: James Morse Message-ID: <3fb354d1-bdc1-8aa2-aa90-4fd92e9a2e9a@arm.com> Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 18:39:32 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210910040117.98736-1-zhangliguang@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! (sorry for the delayed response) On 10/09/2021 05:01, Liguang Zhang wrote: > Function _local_event_enable is used for private sdei event > registeration called by sdei_event_register. We should pass (registration) > sdei_api_event_register right flag and mpidr parameters, otherwise atf > may trigger assert errors. > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_sdei.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_sdei.c > index a7e762c352f9..0736752dadde 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_sdei.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_sdei.c > @@ -558,14 +558,16 @@ static int sdei_api_event_register(u32 event_num, unsigned long entry_point, > static void _local_event_register(void *data) > { > int err; > + u64 mpidr; > struct sdei_registered_event *reg; > struct sdei_crosscall_args *arg = data; > > WARN_ON(preemptible()); > > + mpidr = read_cpuid_mpidr(); > reg = per_cpu_ptr(arg->event->private_registered, smp_processor_id()); > err = sdei_api_event_register(arg->event->event_num, sdei_entry_point, > - reg, 0, 0); > + reg, SDEI_EVENT_REGISTER_RM_PE, mpidr); Hmmm, this looks like a bug in TFA. 5.1.2.2 "Parameters" of DEN 0054B has: | Routing mode is valid only for a shared event. For a private event, the routing mode is | ignored. Worse, the mpidr field has: | Currently the format is defined only when the selected routing mode is RM_PE. Over in trusted firmware land: https://git.trustedfirmware.org/TF-A/trusted-firmware-a.git/tree/services/std_svc/sdei/sdei_main.c?h=v2.5#n361 | static int64_t sdei_event_register(int ev_num, | uint64_t ep, | uint64_t arg, | uint64_t flags, | uint64_t mpidr) | { | /* Private events always target the PE */ | if (is_event_private(map)) | flags = SDEI_REGF_RM_PE; It looks like this re-uses the 'caller specified the routing' code, but didn't update the mpidr. You mention TFA takes an assert failure, I assume that brings the machine down. (Presumably you don't have a CPU with an affinity of zero.) Does this mean no-one relies on this, and we can fix the firmware? (I'll go report this to the relevant folk) Thanks! James > > sdei_cross_call_return(arg, err); > } >