[PATCH v5 02/19] ARM: LPAE: add ISBs around MMU enabling code
Catalin Marinas
catalin.marinas at arm.com
Mon May 9 09:36:35 EDT 2011
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 13:05 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:59:54AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 11:32 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:22:19AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > > Alternatively an exception return would do as well (like movs pc, lr)
> > > > but I think we still add some code for setting up the SPSR.
> > >
> > > That gives us a way out of both of these without introducing any CPU
> > > specific code. We can setup the SPSR before this block of code, and
> > > call it with two movs pc, reg instructions which will provide the
> > > necessary synchronization.
> >
> > We still need an ISB before enabling the MMU to make sure that the TTBR
> > changing is visible. We may run with the MMU enabled (in the identity
> > mapping) before the exception return but with random data in TTBR.
>
> Changes to CP15 registers and the memory order model
> All changes to CP15 registers that appear in program order after any
> explicit memory operations are guaranteed not to affect those memory
> operations.
>
> Any change to CP15 registers is guaranteed to be visible to subsequent
> instructions only after one of:
> • the execution of an ISB instruction
> • the taking of an exception
> • the return from an exception.
...
> So, my reading of this suggests that ISB and returning from an exception
> (iow, movs pc, reg) have the same properties. So:
>
> mcr p15, 0, r5, c3, c0, 0 @ load domain access register
> mcr p15, 0, r4, c2, c0, 0 @ load page table pointer
> - b __turn_mmu_on
> + mrs r4, cpsr @ copy cpsr to spsr
> + msr spsr, r4
> + adr r4, BSYM(__turn_mmu_on)
> + movs pc, r4 @ synchronizing
>
> .align 5
> __turn_mmu_on:
> mov r0, r0
> mcr p15, 0, r0, c1, c0, 0 @ write control reg
> mrc p15, 0, r3, c0, c0, 0 @ read id reg
> mov r3, r3
> mov r3, r13
> - mov pc, r3
> + movs pc, r3 @ synchronizing
>
> should be sufficient - and has the advantage that it should work on
> existing CPUs.
With two exception returns it should work. Only that we need to use LR
so that it compiles fine on Thumb-2 (found a bug in my TTBR1 patch as
well with using r13 as general purpose register, I'll fix it).
--
Catalin
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list