Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-71583-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 15:27:52 +0000
Message-ID: <86a5nw4gp3.wl-maz@kernel.org>
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Cc: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
	open list
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux ARM
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org>,
	Linux
 Regressions <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
	Catalin Marinas
	<catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Dan Carpenter
	<dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
	Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: next-20240219: arm64: boot failed - gic_of_init
In-Reply-To: <a7d8e529-9a44-3f88-50ef-d87b80515c36@huawei.com>
References: <CA+G9fYugYiLd7MDn3wCxK+x5Td9WO-VUX2OvOtTN7D1d4GHCfg@mail.gmail.com>
	<86edd84wer.wl-maz@kernel.org>
	<86cyss4rl7.wl-maz@kernel.org>
	<a7d8e529-9a44-3f88-50ef-d87b80515c36@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/29.1
 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 14:46:46 +0000,
Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2024/2/19 19:32, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > For what it is worth, I've just tested both defconfig and my own
> > configuration with both 4k (kvmtool, QEMU+KVM and on SynQuacer) and
> > 16k (kvmtool), without any obvious problem.
> 
> I had a quick test on top of next-20240219 with defconfig.  I can
> reproduce it with QEMU parameter '-cpu max -accel tcg', but things are
> fine with '-cpu max,lpa2=off -accel tcg'.
> 
> Bisection shows that the problem happens when we start putting the
> latest arm64 and kvmarm changes together.  The following hack fixes the
> problem for me (but I **only** write it for kernel built with defconfig
> with ARM64_4K_PAGES=y atm).
> 
> I can investigate it further tomorrow (as it's too late now ;-) ).  Or
> maybe Marc or Catalin can help fix it with a proper approach.
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index 4f7662008ede..babdc3f4721b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -2798,6 +2798,7 @@ static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities
> arm64_features[] = {
> | 		.sign = FTR_SIGNED,
> | 		.field_pos = ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1_TGRAN4_SHIFT,
> | 		.min_field_value = ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1_TGRAN4_52_BIT,
> |+		.max_field_value = BIT(ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1_TGRAN4_WIDTH - 1) - 1,
> | #else
> | 		.sign = FTR_UNSIGNED,
> | 		.field_pos = ID_AA64MMFR0_EL1_TGRAN16_SHIFT,

I've posted my take on this at [1], which hopefully matches what you
were aiming at.

Thanks,

	M.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/86bk8c4gyh.wl-maz@kernel.org/


-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.