| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 13:03:53 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
To: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale-asia.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Add support for AMD64 EDAC on multiple PCI domains
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 04:32:52PM +0800, Daniel J Blueman wrote:
> The AMD Northbridge initialisation code and EDAC assume the Northbridge IDs
> are contiguous, which no longer holds on federated systems with multiple
> HyperTransport fabrics and multiple PCI domains, eg on Numascale's
> Numaconnect systems with NumaChip.
>
> Address this assumption by searching the Northbridge ID array, rather than
> directly indexing it, using the upper bits for the PCI domain.
>
> RFC->v2: Correct array initialisation
> v2->v3: Add Boris's neater linked list approach
>
> Todo:
> 1. fix kobject/sysfs oops (see http://quora.org/2012/16-server-boot.txt later)
> 2. reorder amd64_edac.c or add amd64_per_family_init/pci_get_related_function
> forward declarations, based on feedback
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale-asia.com>
This patch contains code from both of us and thus needs both our SOBs:
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/amd_nb.h | 63 +++++++++++++++-
> arch/x86/include/asm/numachip/numachip.h | 22 ++++++
> arch/x86/kernel/amd_gart_64.c | 8 +-
> arch/x86/kernel/amd_nb.c | 85 ++++++++++++---------
> arch/x86/pci/numachip.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c | 12 +--
> drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c | 34 +++++----
> drivers/edac/amd64_edac.h | 6 --
> 8 files changed, 283 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/x86/include/asm/numachip/numachip.h
> create mode 100644 arch/x86/pci/numachip.c
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_nb.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_nb.h
> index b3341e9..6a27226 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_nb.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_nb.h
> @@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
> #include <linux/ioport.h>
> #include <linux/pci.h>
>
> +#define NUM_POSSIBLE_NBS 8
> +
> struct amd_nb_bus_dev_range {
> u8 bus;
> u8 dev_base;
> @@ -51,12 +53,22 @@ struct amd_northbridge {
> struct pci_dev *link;
> struct amd_l3_cache l3_cache;
> struct threshold_bank *bank4;
> + u16 node;
> + struct list_head nbl;
> };
>
> struct amd_northbridge_info {
> u16 num;
> u64 flags;
> - struct amd_northbridge *nb;
> +
> + /*
> + * The first 8 elems are for fast lookup of NB descriptors on single-
> + * system setups, i.e. "normal" boxes. The nb_list, OTOH, is list of
> + * additional NB descriptors which exist on confederate systems
> + * like using Numascale's Numaconnect/NumaChip.
> + */
> + struct amd_northbridge *nbs[NUM_POSSIBLE_NBS];
> + struct list_head nb_list;
> };
> extern struct amd_northbridge_info amd_northbridges;
>
> @@ -78,7 +90,54 @@ static inline bool amd_nb_has_feature(unsigned feature)
>
> static inline struct amd_northbridge *node_to_amd_nb(int node)
> {
> - return (node < amd_northbridges.num) ? &amd_northbridges.nb[node] : NULL;
> + struct amd_northbridge_info *nbi = &amd_northbridges;
> + struct amd_northbridge *nb;
> + int i;
> +
> + /* Quick search for first domain */
> + if (node < NUM_POSSIBLE_NBS) {
> + if (node < nbi->num)
> + return nbi->nbs[node];
> + else
> + return NULL;
> + }
Why change that here from what I had before?
nbi->nbs[node] will either return a valid descriptor or NULL because it
is statically allocated in amd_northbridge_info.
So why add a conditional where you clearly don't need it?
> + /* Search for NBs from later domains in array */
> + for (i = 0; i < NUM_POSSIBLE_NBS; i++)
> + if (nbi->nbs[i]->node == node)
> + return nbi->nbs[i];
And then this is not needed.
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(nb, &nbi->nb_list, nbl)
> + if (node == nb->node)
> + return nb;
And why change the list_for_each_entry_safe variant? It is not needed
now but who knows what code changes where in the future.
> +
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +
> +static inline struct amd_northbridge *index_to_amd_nb(int index)
> +{
> + struct amd_northbridge_info *nbi = &amd_northbridges;
> + struct amd_northbridge *nb;
> + int count = NUM_POSSIBLE_NBS;
> +
> + if (index < NUM_POSSIBLE_NBS) {
> + if (index < nbi->num)
> + return nbi->nbs[index];
> + else
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(nb, &nbi->nb_list, nbl) {
> + if (count++ == index)
> + return nb;
> + }
> +
> + return NULL;
> +}
Huh, what do we need that function for? node should be equal to index
for the first 8 and then we use the linked list. What's up?
> +
> +static inline u16 amd_get_node_id(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + return (pci_domain_nr(pdev->bus) << 3) | (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) - 0x18);
> }
>
> #else
[ … ]
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
--
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