lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 13 Apr 2012 12:17:59 +0200
From:	Hubert Feurstein <h.feurstein@...il.com>
To:	Nikolaus Voss <n.voss@...nmann.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, nicolas.ferre@...el.com,
	ben-linux@...ff.org, balbi@...com, rmallon@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/4] drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: add new driver

Hi Niko,

I'm using this driver since a while a now in my system
(soc:at91sam9m10; kernel:v3.2.14) and it works quite well. But
occasionally it happens that wrong data is read from my devices. I've
traced down the issue to the way how you do the interrupt handling. In
your code you do not consider that both status-flags (TXCOMP and
RXRDY) may be pending at the same time. So you handle the TXCOMP but
NOT the RXRDY which will cause a data-loss on the current transfer. As
a consequence also the next transfer will be corrupt, because you
start with old data in RHR. So I would suggest the following changes:

static irqreturn_t atmel_twi_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
	struct at91_twi_dev *dev = dev_id;
	const unsigned status = at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
	unsigned irqstatus = status & at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_IMR);

	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
		irqstatus &= ~AT91_TWI_RXRDY;
	}

	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
		irqstatus &= ~AT91_TWI_TXRDY;
	}

	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXCOMP) {
		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
		dev->transfer_status = status;
		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
		irqstatus &= ~AT91_TWI_TXCOMP;
	}
	
	if (irqstatus) {
		/* There should be no pending interrupt anymore. *)
		return IRQ_NONE;
	}

	return IRQ_HANDLED;
}

To make sure that we do not start with old data in any case, I would
suggest to read SR and RHR before initiating a new transfer.

static int at91_do_twi_transfer(struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
{
	int ret;

	dev_dbg(dev->dev, "transfer: %s %d bytes.\n",
		(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) ? "read" : "write", dev->buf_len);

	INIT_COMPLETION(dev->cmd_complete);
	if (dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
		unsigned start_flags = AT91_TWI_START;

		/* clear any pending data */
		(void)at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_SR);
		(void)at91_twi_read(dev, AT91_TWI_RHR);
		
		/* if only one byte is to be read, immediately stop transfer */
		if (dev->buf_len <= 1 && !(dev->msg->flags & I2C_M_RECV_LEN))
			start_flags |= AT91_TWI_STOP;
		at91_twi_write(dev, AT91_TWI_CR, start_flags);

		[snip]
}


Hubert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ