Re: [PATCH] MIPS: mm: Prevent a TLB shutdown on initial uniquification
From: Thomas Bogendoerfer
Date: Tue Nov 11 2025 - 07:27:21 EST
On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 06:21:46AM +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> Depending on the particular CPU implementation a TLB shutdown may occur
> if multiple matching entries are detected upon the execution of a TLBP
> or the TLBWI/TLBWR instructions. Given that we don't know what entries
> we have been handed we need to be very careful with the initial TLB
> setup and avoid all these instructions.
>
> Therefore read all the TLB entries one by one with the TLBR instruction,
> bypassing the content addressing logic, and preinitialize the TLB using
> addresses outside our usual unique range and avoiding clashes with any
> incoming contents before making the usual call to local_flush_tlb_all().
>
> This fixes (at least) R4x00 cores if TLBP hits multiple matching TLB
> entries (SGI IP22 PROM for examples sets up all TLBs to the same virtual
> address).
>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej W. Rozycki <macro@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 35ad7e181541 ("MIPS: mm: tlb-r4k: Uniquify TLB entries on init")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # v6.17+
> ---
> Hi,
>
> I have verified this lightly, also with some diagnostics added so as to
> make sure things get set up correctly, with my Malta/74Kf system for a
> 32-bit configuration and with my SWARM/BCM1250 system for a 64-bit one.
> Sadly the latter box does not finish booting either way, but it's to be
> bisected separately.
>
> Can you please give it a try with your systems?
it's booting on my R4400 SGI Indy, but I see a lot of segmentation
faults during system start. If I comment out r4k_tlb_uniquify() every-
thing boots fine, which is kind of strange as there is a local_flush_tlb_all(),
which should leave the TLB in the same stage.... No idea why, yet.
> arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
>
> linux-mips-tlb-r4k-uniquify-fix.diff
> Index: linux-macro/arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-macro.orig/arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c
> +++ linux-macro/arch/mips/mm/tlb-r4k.c
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
> #include <linux/mm.h>
> #include <linux/hugetlb.h>
> #include <linux/export.h>
> +#include <linux/sort.h>
>
> #include <asm/cpu.h>
> #include <asm/cpu-type.h>
> @@ -508,54 +509,70 @@ static int __init set_ntlb(char *str)
>
> __setup("ntlb=", set_ntlb);
>
> -/* Initialise all TLB entries with unique values */
> +
> +/* Comparison function for EntryHi VPN fields. */
> +static int r4k_vpn_cmp(const void *a, const void *b)
> +{
> + return ((*(unsigned long *)a - *(unsigned long *)b) >>
> + (sizeof(unsigned long) - sizeof(int)) * 8);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Initialise all TLB entries with unique values that do not clash with
> + * what we have been handed over and what we'll be using ourselves.
> + */
> static void r4k_tlb_uniquify(void)
> {
> - int entry = num_wired_entries();
> + unsigned long tlb_vpns[1 << MIPS_CONF1_TLBS_SIZE];
> + int tlbsize = current_cpu_data.tlbsize;
> + int start = num_wired_entries();
> + unsigned long vpn_mask;
> + int cnt, ent, idx, i;
> +
> + vpn_mask = GENMASK(cpu_vmbits - 1, 13);
> + vpn_mask |= IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_64BIT) ? 3ULL << 62 : 1 << 31;
>
> htw_stop();
> +
> + for (i = start, cnt = 0; i < tlbsize; i++, cnt++) {
shouldn't we read all TLB entries here ?
Thomas.
--
Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessarily a
good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]