linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PCI: iproc: Allow allocation of multiple MSIs

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:   Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:09:34 -0700
From:   Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
To:     Bodo-Merle Sandor <esndbod@...il.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Sandor Bodo-Merle <sbodomerle@...il.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
        Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
        Jon Mason <jonmason@...adcom.com>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: iproc: Allow allocation of multiple MSIs

Hi Bodo,

On 10/7/2017 5:08 AM, Bodo-Merle Sandor wrote:
> From: Sandor Bodo-Merle <sbodomerle@...il.com>
> 
> Add support for allocating multiple MSIs at the same time, so that the
> MSI_FLAG_MULTI_PCI_MSI flag can be added to the msi_domain_info
> structure.
> 
> Avoid storing the hwirq in the low 5 bits of the message data, as it is
> used by the device. Also fix an endianness problem by using readl().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sandor Bodo-Merle <sbodomerle@...il.com>
> ---
>   drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc-msi.c | 19 ++++++++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc-msi.c b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc-msi.c
> index 2d0f535a2f69..990fc906d73d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc-msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-iproc-msi.c
> @@ -179,7 +179,7 @@ static struct irq_chip iproc_msi_irq_chip = {
>   
>   static struct msi_domain_info iproc_msi_domain_info = {
>   	.flags = MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_DOM_OPS | MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS |
> -		MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX,
> +		MSI_FLAG_MULTI_PCI_MSI | MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX,
>   	.chip = &iproc_msi_irq_chip,
>   };
>   
> @@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ static void iproc_msi_irq_compose_msi_msg(struct irq_data *data,
>   	addr = msi->msi_addr + iproc_msi_addr_offset(msi, data->hwirq);
>   	msg->address_lo = lower_32_bits(addr);
>   	msg->address_hi = upper_32_bits(addr);
> -	msg->data = data->hwirq;
> +	msg->data = data->hwirq << 5; >   }
>   
>   static struct irq_chip iproc_msi_bottom_irq_chip = {
> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ static int iproc_msi_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>   				      void *args)
>   {
>   	struct iproc_msi *msi = domain->host_data;
> -	int hwirq;
> +	int hwirq, i;
>   
>   	mutex_lock(&msi->bitmap_lock);
>   
> @@ -267,10 +267,14 @@ static int iproc_msi_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain,
>   
>   	mutex_unlock(&msi->bitmap_lock);
>   
> -	irq_domain_set_info(domain, virq, hwirq, &iproc_msi_bottom_irq_chip,
> -			    domain->host_data, handle_simple_irq, NULL, NULL);
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
> +		irq_domain_set_info(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> +				    &iproc_msi_bottom_irq_chip,
> +				    domain->host_data, handle_simple_irq,
> +				    NULL, NULL);
> +	}
>   
> -	return 0;
> +	return hwirq;
>   }
>   
>   static void iproc_msi_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain,
> @@ -302,7 +306,8 @@ static inline u32 decode_msi_hwirq(struct iproc_msi *msi, u32 eq, u32 head)
>   
>   	offs = iproc_msi_eq_offset(msi, eq) + head * sizeof(u32);
>   	msg = (u32 *)(msi->eq_cpu + offs);
> -	hwirq = *msg & IPROC_MSI_EQ_MASK;
> +	hwirq = readl(msg);
> +	hwirq = (hwirq >> 5) + (hwirq & 0x1f);
>   
>   	/*
>   	 * Since we have multiple hwirq mapped to a single MSI vector,nnn
> 

Change looks okay to me in general. May I know which platform you tested 
this patch on and was SMP affinity configuration tested?

Thanks,

Ray