[PATCH] armv8: cpu: Implement allow_unaligned()

Usually ARMv8 platforms allow unaligned access for Normal memory. But some chips might not allow it by default, having SCTLR.A bit set to 1 before U-Boot execution. One such example is Exynos850 SoC. As allow_unaligned() is not implemented for ARMv8 at the moment, its __weak implementation is used, which does nothing. That might lead to unaligned access abort, for example when running EFI selftest. Fix that by implementing allow_unaligned() for ARMv8.
The issue was found when running EFI selftest on E850-96 board (Exynos850 based):
=> bootefi selftest $fdtcontroladdr
... Executing 'HII database protocols' "Synchronous Abort" handler, esr 0x96000021, far 0xbaac0991 ... resetting ...
Unaligned abort happens in u16_strnlen(), which is called from efi_hii_sibt_string_ucs2_block_next():
u16_strlen(blk->string_text)
where 'blk' type is struct efi_hii_sibt_string_ucs2_block. Because this struct is packed, doing "->string_text" makes 'blk' address incremented by 1 byte, which makes it unaligned. Although allow_unaligned() was called in efi_init_early() before EFI selftest execution, it wasn't implemented for ARMv8 CPUs, so data abort happened.
Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko semen.protsenko@linaro.org --- arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c index d568efa427ab..82ecf02f4b03 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c @@ -94,3 +94,8 @@ void armv8_setup_psci(void) secure_ram_addr(psci_arch_init)(); } #endif + +void allow_unaligned(void) +{ + set_sctlr(get_sctlr() & ~CR_A); +}

On 10/31/24 23:06, Sam Protsenko wrote:
Usually ARMv8 platforms allow unaligned access for Normal memory. But some chips might not allow it by default, having SCTLR.A bit set to 1 before U-Boot execution. One such example is Exynos850 SoC. As allow_unaligned() is not implemented for ARMv8 at the moment, its __weak implementation is used, which does nothing. That might lead to unaligned access abort, for example when running EFI selftest. Fix that by implementing allow_unaligned() for ARMv8.
The issue was found when running EFI selftest on E850-96 board (Exynos850 based):
=> bootefi selftest $fdtcontroladdr ... Executing 'HII database protocols' "Synchronous Abort" handler, esr 0x96000021, far 0xbaac0991 ... resetting ...
Unaligned abort happens in u16_strnlen(), which is called from efi_hii_sibt_string_ucs2_block_next():
u16_strlen(blk->string_text)
where 'blk' type is struct efi_hii_sibt_string_ucs2_block. Because this struct is packed, doing "->string_text" makes 'blk' address incremented by 1 byte, which makes it unaligned. Although allow_unaligned() was called in efi_init_early() before EFI selftest execution, it wasn't implemented for ARMv8 CPUs, so data abort happened.
Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko semen.protsenko@linaro.org
arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c index d568efa427ab..82ecf02f4b03 100644 --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cpu.c @@ -94,3 +94,8 @@ void armv8_setup_psci(void) secure_ram_addr(psci_arch_init)(); } #endif
+void allow_unaligned(void) +{
- set_sctlr(get_sctlr() & ~CR_A);
Looking at the ARM documentation SCTLR_EL2 is a 64bit register.
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ddi0595/2021-06/AArch64-Registers/SC...
But get_sctlr() is defined as
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h:174: static inline unsigned int get_sctlr(void)
Your code might not work as expected. Should we adjust the definition of get_sctlr() to return a long value?
Best regards
Heinrich
+}

On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 6:46 AM Heinrich Schuchardt xypron.glpk@gmx.de wrote:
[snip]
+void allow_unaligned(void) +{
set_sctlr(get_sctlr() & ~CR_A);
Looking at the ARM documentation SCTLR_EL2 is a 64bit register.
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ddi0595/2021-06/AArch64-Registers/SC...
But get_sctlr() is defined as
arch/arm/include/asm/system.h:174: static inline unsigned int get_sctlr(void)
Your code might not work as expected. Should we adjust the definition of get_sctlr() to return a long value?
Hi Heinrich,
Good catch! I totally overlooked it. And it's already used in a similar way in a couple of different places. I'll handle that in my v2 soon.
Thanks!
Best regards
Heinrich
+}
participants (2)
-
Heinrich Schuchardt
-
Sam Protsenko