Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: cacheflush: Fix KGDB trap detection

[Daniel Thompson]

On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 04:09:16PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 03:15:29PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 09:48:04PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 06:05:18PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h
> > > > index e6cca3d4acf7..ce50c1f1f1ea 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cacheflush.h
> > > > @@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ static inline void flush_icache_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > > >  	 * IPI all online CPUs so that they undergo a context synchronization
> > > >  	 * event and are forced to refetch the new instructions.
> > > >  	 */
> > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_KGDB
> > > > +
> > > >  	/*
> > > >  	 * KGDB performs cache maintenance with interrupts disabled, so we
> > > >  	 * will deadlock trying to IPI the secondary CPUs. In theory, we can
> > > > @@ -89,9 +89,9 @@ static inline void flush_icache_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> > > >  	 * the patching operation, so we don't need extra IPIs here anyway.
> > > >  	 * In which case, add a KGDB-specific bodge and return early.
> > > >  	 */
> > > > -	if (kgdb_connected && irqs_disabled())
> > > > +	if (in_dbg_master())
> > > 
> > > Does this imply that irqs are disabled?
> > 
> > Yes.

Except for bugs...


> > 
> > Assuming CONFIG_KGDB is enabled then in_dbg_master() expands to:
> > 
> >     (raw_smp_processor_id() == atomic_read(&kgdb_active))
> 
> Aha, so this can drop the raw_ prefix and call smp_processor_id() instead?

We need to allow in_dbg_master() to be called from preemptible contexts
(because its job it to disclose information about our executions
context) but given irqs are always disabled when we in_dbg_master()
then I think we can make this and rely on short-circuit eval to
avoid PREEMPT_DEBUG errors:

    (irqs_disabled() && (smp_processor_id() == atomic_read(&kgdb_active)))


> I can queue the arm64 patch regardless.

I don't want to hide anything... when I looked closer I realized
that the above change also eliminates a small window where the original
macro can spuriously evaluate to true.

Specifically if we migrate to a new core after reading the processor
id and the previous core takes a breakpoint then we would evaluate
true if we read kgdb_active before we get the IPI to bring us to halt.

Sorry for overlooking this in my reply yesterday! I'll have a patch out
for this shortly.


Daniel.