On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 07:26:32PM +0530, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
From: Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>No, this is not the 1990's, module parameters do not work and are not
Some debuggers, such as Trace32 from Lauterbach GmbH, do not handle
reads/writes from/to DCC on secondary cores. Each core has its
own DCC device registers, so when a core reads or writes from/to DCC,
it only accesses its own DCC device. Since kernel code can run on
any core, every time the kernel wants to write to the console, it
might write to a different DCC.
In SMP mode, Trace32 creates multiple windows, and each window shows
the DCC output only from that core's DCC. The result is that console
output is either lost or scattered across windows.
Selecting this option will enable code that serializes all console
input and output to core 0. The DCC driver will create input and
output FIFOs that all cores will use. Reads and writes from/to DCC
are handled by a workqueue that runs only core 0.
Signed-off-by: Shanker Donthineni <shankerd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Adam Wallis <awallis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <eberman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sai Prakash Ranjan <quic_saipraka@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Changes in v4:
* Use module parameter for runtime choice of enabling this feature.
sustainable. They operate on a code-level while you are modifying a
device-specific attribute here. Please make this per-device if you
really want to be able to somehow turn this on or off.
* Use hotplug locks to avoid race between cpu online check and work schedule.Why these random sizes? Why is one bigger than the other? Why are they
* Remove ifdefs and move to common ops.
* Remove unnecessary check for this configuration.
* Use macros for buf size instead of magic numbers.
* v3 - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20211213141013.21464-1-quic_saipraka@xxxxxxxxxxx/
Changes in v3:
* Handle case where core0 is not online.
Changes in v2:
* Checkpatch warning fixes.
* Use of IS_ENABLED macros instead of ifdefs.
---
drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_dcc.c | 177 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 174 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_dcc.c b/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_dcc.c
index 8e0edb7d93fd..535b09441e55 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_dcc.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/hvc/hvc_dcc.c
@@ -2,19 +2,35 @@
/* Copyright (c) 2010, 2014 The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved. */
#include <linux/console.h>
+#include <linux/cpu.h>
+#include <linux/cpumask.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/kfifo.h>
+#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
#include <linux/serial.h>
#include <linux/serial_core.h>
+#include <linux/spinlock.h>
#include <asm/dcc.h>
#include <asm/processor.h>
#include "hvc_console.h"
+static bool serialize_smp;
+module_param(serialize_smp, bool, 0444);
+MODULE_PARM_DESC(serialize_smp, "Serialize all DCC console input and output to CPU core 0");
+
/* DCC Status Bits */
#define DCC_STATUS_RX (1 << 30)
#define DCC_STATUS_TX (1 << 29)
+#define DCC_INBUF_SIZE 128
+#define DCC_OUTBUF_SIZE 1024
these specific numbers?
+What is this locking? Please document it (didn't checkpatch complain?)
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(dcc_lock);
+static DEFINE_KFIFO(inbuf, unsigned char, DCC_INBUF_SIZE);Why are you checking smp_processor_id()? Are you sure it is safe to do
+static DEFINE_KFIFO(outbuf, unsigned char, DCC_OUTBUF_SIZE);
+
static void dcc_uart_console_putchar(struct uart_port *port, int ch)
{
while (__dcc_getstatus() & DCC_STATUS_TX)
@@ -67,24 +83,179 @@ static int hvc_dcc_get_chars(uint32_t vt, char *buf, int count)
return i;
}
+/*
+ * Check if the DCC is enabled. If serialize_smp module param is enabled,
+ * then we assume then this function will be called first on core0. That way,
+ * dcc_core0_available will be true only if it's available on core0.
+ */
static bool hvc_dcc_check(void)
{
unsigned long time = jiffies + (HZ / 10);
+ static bool dcc_core0_available;
+
+ /*
+ * If we're not on core 0, but we previously confirmed that DCC is
+ * active, then just return true.
+ */
+ if (serialize_smp && smp_processor_id() && dcc_core0_available)
that here?
+ return true;That's a hard busy loop, are you sure it will always exit?
/* Write a test character to check if it is handled */
__dcc_putchar('\n');
while (time_is_after_jiffies(time)) {
- if (!(__dcc_getstatus() & DCC_STATUS_TX))
+ if (!(__dcc_getstatus() & DCC_STATUS_TX)) {
+ dcc_core0_available = true;
return true;
+ }