Hi Atish,
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 9:28 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 3:21 AM Atish Patra <atishp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 2:26 PM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 20 Jan 2022, at 09:09, Atish Patra <atishp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > Currently, SBI APIs accept a hartmask that is generated from struct
> > > > cpumask. Cpumask data structure can hold upto NR_CPUs value. Thus, it
> > > > is not the correct data structure for hartids as it can be higher
> > > > than NR_CPUs for platforms with sparse or discontguous hartids.
> > > >
> > > > Remove all association between hartid mask and struct cpumask.
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Anup Patel <anup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (For Linux RISC-V changes)
> > > > Acked-by: Anup Patel <anup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (For KVM RISC-V changes)
> > > > Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atishp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> > I am yet to reproduce it on my end.
> > @Geert Uytterhoeven: can you please try the below diff on your end.
>
> Unfortunately it doesn't fix the issue for me.
>
> /me debugging...
Found it: after this commit, the SBI_EXT_RFENCE_REMOTE_FENCE_I and
SBI_EXT_RFENCE_REMOTE_SFENCE_VMA ecalls are now called with
hmask = 0x8000000000000001 and hbase = 1 instead of hmask = 3 and
hbase = 0.
cpuid 1 maps to hartid 0
cpuid 0 maps to hartid 1
__sbi_rfence_v02:364: cpuid 1 hartid 0
__sbi_rfence_v02:377: hartid 0 hbase 1
hmask |= 1UL << (hartid - hbase);
oops
__sbi_rfence_v02_call:303: SBI_EXT_RFENCE_REMOTE_FENCE_I hmask
8000000000000001 hbase 1
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
