linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.18-rc5-mm1: drivers/infiniband/hw/amso1100/c2.c compile error

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]

Message-Id: <20060901130444.48f19457.akpm@osdl.org>
Date:	Fri, 1 Sep 2006 13:04:44 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
To:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Tom Tucker <tom@...ngridcomputing.com>,
	Steve Wise <swise@...ngridcomputing.com>,
	Roland Dreier <rolandd@...co.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, openib-general@...nib.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: 2.6.18-rc5-mm1: drivers/infiniband/hw/amso1100/c2.c compile
 error

On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 12:53:47 -0700
Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com> wrote:

>     Roland> My understanding is that __raw_writeq() is like writeq()
>     Roland> except not strongly ordered and without the byte-swap on
>     Roland> big-endian architectures.  The __raw_writeX() variants are
>     Roland> convenient to avoid having to write inefficient code like
>     Roland> writel(swab32(foo), ...) when talking to a PCI device that
>     Roland> wants big-endian data.  Without the raw variant, you end
>     Roland> up with a double swap on big-endian architectures.
> 
> Oh, I left one other thing out: writeq() and __raw_writeq() shold be
> atomic in the sense that no other transactions should be able to get
> onto the IO bus in the middle -- so implementing writeq() as two
> writel()s in a row is not allowed
> 
>     Andrew> OK.  Can we please stop hacking around this in drivers and
> 
>     Andrew> a) work out what it's supposed to do
> 
>     Andrew> b) document that (Documentation/DocBook/deviceiobook.tmpl
>     Andrew> or code comment or whatever)
> 
>     Andrew> c) tell arch maintainers?
> 
> Yes, I agree that's a good plan, especially the documentation part.
> However I would argue that what's in drivers/infiniband/hw/mthca/mthca_doorbell.h 
> is legitimate: the driver uses __raw_writeq() when it exists and uses
> two __raw_writel()s properly serialized with a device-specific lock to
> get exactly the atomicity it needs on 32-bit archs.

No, driver-specific workarounds are not legitimate, sorry.

The driver should simply fail to compile on architectures which do not
implement __raw_writeq().

We can speed up the process by sending helpful emails to architecture
maintainers, but they'll notice either way.

Let's fix it once, and in the correct place.

> It's an open question what drivers that don't actually need atomicity
> but just want a convenient way to write 64 bits at time should do.

Well yeah.  We should sort out the design issues before implementing
things ;)

-
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/