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, 30 Oct 2007 18:23:14 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> To: Shawn Jin <shawnxjin@...il.com> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Multiple MSI messages support Shawn Jin wrote: > Hi, > > If this is really off-topic here, I apologize first. But I cannot > think a better place to ask this particular question. > > I understand that the current PCI subsystem or linux kernel (x86) > supports only one message when MSI is enabled even for devices having > multiple MSI messages. But why? Is this a limitation solely due to the > OS or due to the x86 APIC? > > I know the current linux kernel (2.6.23) changed MSI message data > format a little bit to support other architectures. But some older > version (e.g. 2.6.18) defined a specific format for the MSI msg data > in a way that 8 bits contain the irq number and the other 8 bits have > the interrupt attributes, which is x86 specific. Why does the msg data > need to contain the irq number? Here is my hypothetic explanation. The > device writes the MSI msg data to the specified MSI msg address. And > APIC uses the irq number in the msg data to generate appropriate > interrupt, which of course results in an appropriate ISR invoked. A > device having multiple MSI messages typically appends some information > of which MSI message to the msg data field. For example, if the system > (or OS) configures the MSI msg data as 0x5000, a device having 4 MSI > messages could write 0x5000, 0x5001, 0x5002, 0x5003 to differentiate > the MSI messages. However this cannot work with the APIC due to the > way how APIC asserts interrupts as I described above (if my > understanding is correct). > > Hence my answer to the question is this is due to the x86 APIC. For > other architectures such as powerpc this is probably not a problem > since the interrupt controller is different. Am I correct? IMO it's more like there has never been enough need for anybody to look into it, I bet... The way drivers are written, you are typically must touch a few key hardware registers _anyway_, so the multiple messages in practice are not much more useful than the simple fact that your MSI irq handler function was called (with all that indicates and implies). Jeff - 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