arm64: cpufeature: Fix CTR_EL0 field definitions

commit be68a8aaf925aaf35574260bf820bb09d2f9e07f upstream.

Our field definitions for CTR_EL0 suffer from a number of problems:

  - The IDC and DIC fields are missing, which causes us to enable CTR
    trapping on CPUs with either of these returning non-zero values.

  - The ERG is FTR_LOWER_SAFE, whereas it should be treated like CWG as
    FTR_HIGHER_SAFE so that applications can use it to avoid false sharing.

  - [nit] A RES1 field is described as "RAO"

This patch updates the CTR_EL0 field definitions to fix these issues.

Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 4.4.y only
Cc: Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@codeaurora.org>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
Will Deacon 2019-08-05 18:13:07 +01:00 committed by prashantpaddune
parent de18f2cf84
commit c88e6c2af2

View File

@ -143,10 +143,12 @@ static struct arm64_ftr_bits ftr_id_aa64mmfr2[] = {
}; };
static struct arm64_ftr_bits ftr_ctr[] = { static struct arm64_ftr_bits ftr_ctr[] = {
U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_EXACT, 31, 1, 1), /* RAO */ U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_EXACT, 31, 1, 1), /* RES1 */
ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_EXACT, 28, 3, 0), ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_EXACT, 30, 1, 0),
U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, 29, 1, 1), /* DIC */
U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, 28, 1, 1), /* IDC */
U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_HIGHER_SAFE, 24, 4, 0), /* CWG */ U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_HIGHER_SAFE, 24, 4, 0), /* CWG */
U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, 20, 4, 0), /* ERG */ U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_HIGHER_SAFE, 20, 4, 0), /* ERG */
U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, 16, 4, 1), /* DminLine */ U_ARM64_FTR_BITS(FTR_STRICT, FTR_LOWER_SAFE, 16, 4, 1), /* DminLine */
/* /*
* Linux can handle differing I-cache policies. Userspace JITs will * Linux can handle differing I-cache policies. Userspace JITs will