[PATCH v6 09/10] arm_mpam: change MPAM-Fb error IRQ to use a threaded IRQ handler
Andre Przywara
andre.przywara at arm.com
Fri Jul 31 09:56:28 PDT 2026
Hi,
On 7/31/26 15:33, Ben Horgan wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> On 7/30/26 16:25, 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 current hard-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
>> an MSC access as well.
>>
>> When an MSC is using MPAM-Fb, change the error IRQ to use a threaded IRQ
>> handler, with an empty hard IRQ routine, and doing all the MSC accesses
>> (to access the status and disable the IRQ line) in the threaded part.
>> The change is minimal, we just check for the first MSC access error and
>> bail out early. MMIO based MSCs keep using a hard-IRQ handler, since
>> they must be at least non-migrate-able when doing MSC accesses, for the
>> CPU affinity check to work.
>> Also forbid per-CPU interrupts (PPIs) for MPAM-Fb, as we cannot use a
>> threaded IRQ here.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara at arm.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c
>> index daaf3cf48475..606ae4af2be9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c
>> +++ b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c
>> @@ -2660,24 +2660,38 @@ static int mpam_disable_msc_ecr(void *_msc)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +/*
>> + * This will run as the threaded IRQ handler part when using MPAM-Fb, but
>> + * as the sole hard-IRQ handler for MMIO based accesses.
>> + */
>> static irqreturn_t __mpam_irq_handler(int irq, struct mpam_msc *msc)
>> {
>> u64 reg;
>> + int ret;
>> u16 partid;
>> u8 errcode, pmg, ris;
>>
>> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!msc) ||
>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!msc))
>> + return IRQ_NONE;
>> +
>> + if (msc->iface == MPAM_IFACE_MMIO &&
>> WARN_ON_ONCE(!cpumask_test_cpu(smp_processor_id(),
>> &msc->accessibility)))
>> return IRQ_NONE;
>>
>> - mpam_msc_read_esr(msc, ®);
>> + ret = mpam_msc_read_esr(msc, ®);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + pr_err_ratelimited("unknown error irq from msc:%u\n", msc->id);
>> +
>> + /* Try out best here ... */
>> + goto out_disable;
>> + }
>>
>> errcode = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_ERRCODE, reg);
>> if (!errcode)
>> return IRQ_NONE;
>>
>> - /* Clear level triggered irq */
>> + /* Clear level triggered irq. Ignore errors, we need to proceed. */
>> mpam_msc_clear_esr(msc);
>>
>> partid = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_PARTID_MON, reg);
>> @@ -2688,19 +2702,19 @@ static irqreturn_t __mpam_irq_handler(int irq, struct mpam_msc *msc)
>> msc->id, mpam_errcode_names[errcode], partid, pmg,
>> ris);
>>
>> - /* Disable this interrupt. */
>> +out_disable:
>> + /* Disable this interrupt. Ignore errors, we need to proceed anyway. */
>> mpam_disable_msc_ecr(msc);
>
> If we fail to disable the interrupt then I don't think we can claim we handled it.
> Shouldn't we, after scheduling broken work, return IRQ_NONE?
That's tricky, I'd say. IRQ_NONE means the handler is not recognising
the interrupt, so it probably becomes spurious, which doesn't sound right.
So I think IRQ_HANDLED is the least worst of the two. We are somewhat
doomed, but eventually mpam_disable() will unregister the IRQ, so it
won't fire again. And we protect again repeated calls to mpam_disable(),
should the IRQ handler be called again.
Cheers,
Andre
>>
>> - /* Are we racing with the thread disabling MPAM? */
>> - if (!mpam_is_enabled())
>> - return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> -
>> /*
>> - * Schedule the teardown work. Don't use a threaded IRQ as we can't
>> - * unregister the interrupt from the threaded part of the handler.
>> + * Schedule the teardown work. We have to defer it as we can't
>> + * unregister the interrupt from the threaded part of a handler.
>> + * Check whether we are racing with the thread disabling MPAM.
>> */
>> - mpam_disable_reason = "hardware error interrupt";
>> - schedule_work(&mpam_broken_work);
>> + if (mpam_is_enabled()) {
>> + mpam_disable_reason = "hardware error interrupt";
>> + schedule_work(&mpam_broken_work);
>> + }
>>
>> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> }
>> @@ -2736,6 +2750,11 @@ static int mpam_register_irqs(void)
>> /* The MPAM spec says the interrupt can be SPI, PPI or LPI */
>> /* We anticipate sharing the interrupt with other MSCs */
>> if (irq_is_percpu(irq)) {
>> + if (msc->iface != MPAM_IFACE_MMIO) {
>> + dev_err(&msc->pdev->dev,
>> + "Only MMIO MSCs can use per-CPU interrupts\n");
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> err = request_percpu_irq(irq, &mpam_ppi_handler,
>> "mpam:msc:error",
>> msc->error_dev_id);
>> @@ -2747,9 +2766,24 @@ static int mpam_register_irqs(void)
>> &_enable_percpu_irq, &irq,
>> true);
>> } else {
>> - err = devm_request_irq(&msc->pdev->dev, irq,
>> - &mpam_spi_handler, IRQF_SHARED,
>> - "mpam:msc:error", msc);
>> + irq_handler_t hard, threaded;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * MPAM-Fb needs a sleepable context for the MSC
>> + * accesses, whereas MMIO requires at least a
>> + * non-migrateable context for the processor ID check.
>> + */
>> + if (msc->iface == MPAM_IFACE_MMIO) {
>> + hard = &mpam_spi_handler;
>> + threaded = NULL;
>> + } else {
>> + hard = NULL;
>> + threaded = &mpam_spi_handler;
>> + }
>> + err = devm_request_threaded_irq(&msc->pdev->dev, irq,
>> + hard, threaded,
>> + IRQF_SHARED | IRQF_ONESHOT,
>> + "mpam:msc:error", msc);
>> if (err)
>> return err;
>> }
>
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list