Re: [PATCH v4 09/10] arm_mpam: prevent MPAM-Fb accesses inside IRQ handler
Ben Horgan <[email protected]> Fri, 24 Jul 2026 17:52:33 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.acpi.devel,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Andre, On 7/23/26 16:54, Andre Przywara wrote: > When an MPAM MSC gets into an error condition, it can trigger an error > IRQ. We cannot really do much about those errors, but we at least query > and log the error, then disable MPAM functionality. > > This error report relies on reading the MSC's error status register > (ESR) in the IRQ handler, which is not possible for MPAM-Fb based > MSC accesses, since they involve mailbox routines that might sleep. > The same is true for clearing the interrupt at the source, which > requires MSC access. > > For simplicity just skip the ESR read when the MSC is not using direct > MMIO accesses, and just ignore the pending interrupts. We will wrap up > MPAM functionality regardless, knowing the exact error value will not > change that. > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c > index b8108ed4b32c..fea3161ffbe9 100644 > --- a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c > +++ b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c > @@ -2650,25 +2650,33 @@ static irqreturn_t __mpam_irq_handler(int irq, struct mpam_msc *msc) > &msc->accessibility))) > return IRQ_NONE; > > - mpam_msc_read_esr(msc, ®); > + /* MPAM-Fb MSC accesses cannot be done in atomic context. */ > + if (msc->iface == MPAM_IFACE_MMIO) { > + mpam_msc_read_esr(msc, ®); > > - errcode = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_ERRCODE, reg); > - if (!errcode) > - return IRQ_NONE; > + errcode = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_ERRCODE, reg); > + if (!errcode) > + return IRQ_NONE; > > - /* Clear level triggered irq */ > - mpam_msc_clear_esr(msc); > + /* Clear level triggered irq */ > + mpam_msc_clear_esr(msc); > > - partid = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_PARTID_MON, reg); > - pmg = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_PMG, reg); > - ris = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_RIS, reg); > + partid = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_PARTID_MON, reg); > + pmg = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_PMG, reg); > + ris = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_RIS, reg); > > - pr_err_ratelimited("error irq from msc:%u '%s', partid:%u, pmg: %u, ris: %u\n", > - msc->id, mpam_errcode_names[errcode], partid, pmg, > - ris); > + pr_err_ratelimited("error irq from msc:%u '%s', partid:%u, pmg: %u, ris: %u\n", > + msc->id, mpam_errcode_names[errcode], partid, > + pmg, ris); > > - /* Disable this interrupt. */ > - mpam_disable_msc_ecr(msc); > + /* Disable this interrupt. */ > + mpam_disable_msc_ecr(msc); I still think we should use a threaded interrupt with IRQF_ONESHOT and disable the interrupt and schedule the mpam_disable from there. That way it can be obvious that won't just keep on running the interrupt handler and never getting to run the scheduled work. Thanks, Ben > + } else { > + struct irq_data *d = irq_get_irq_data(irq); > + > + pr_err_ratelimited("unknown error irq %d/%ld from msc:%u\n", > + irq, d ? irqd_to_hwirq(d) : -1, msc->id); > + } > > /* Are we racing with the thread disabling MPAM? */ > if (!mpam_is_enabled())