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: Tue, 06 Feb 2018 15:05:03 +1100 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> To: Ryder Lee <ryder.lee@...iatek.com> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, "moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] of_pci_irq: add a check to fallback to standard device tree parsing On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 10:38 +0800, Ryder Lee wrote: > > I think the code should look at the bridge address <0x0800 ...> we list > in bindings for resolving interrupts in this case, but it seems like it > use the 'pdev->defvn << 8' which is not really we want and will lead to > mismatch. > > interrupt-map-mask = <0xf800 0 0 7>; > interrupt-map = <0x0000 0 0 1 ...>, > <0x0000 0 0 2 ...>, > <0x0000 0 0 3 ...>, > <0x0000 0 0 4 ...>, > > 0x0800 0 0 1 ...>, > 0x0800 0 0 2 ...>, > 0x0800 0 0 3 ...>, > 0x0800 0 0 4 ...>; > ... > pcie@1,0 { > reg = <0x0800 0 0 0 0>; > ... > }; > > > Or, alternatively, we could add a interrupt-map property in both child > and root node to solve this. The below example is my original version as > I don't want to change that function either. The code looks at devfn because it's meant to work for PCI including when the devices dont have a device node in the DT. What I'm trying to figure out is what is it that your parent and children are representing here. Which is/are the root complex ? What is the actual topology as visible on the PCIe bus (is lspci output basically) and how does that map to your representation ? > interrupt-map-mask = <0xf800 0 0 0>; > interrupt-map = <0x0000 0 0 0 ...>, > 0x0800 0 0 0 ...>; > ... > pcie@1,0 { > reg = <0x0800 0 0 0 0>; > #interrupt-cells = <1>; > interrupt-map-mask = <0 0 0 0>; > interrupt-map = <0 0 0 0 ...>; > ... > }; > > However, I can't find any other similar case in documentation. > > Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists