| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <625BA99ED14B2D499DC4E29D8138F1506E01AAC03A@shsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:29:12 +0800
From: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@...el.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nok.org>
CC: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
"Yu, Ke" <ke.yu@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>, "rjw@...k.pl" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"jeremy@...p.org" <jeremy@...p.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"Ian.Campbell@...rix.com" <Ian.Campbell@...rix.com>,
"mike.mcclurg@...rix.com" <mike.mcclurg@...rix.com>,
"stefan.bader@...onical.com" <stefan.bader@...onical.com>,
"konrad@...nel.org" <konrad@...nel.org>,
"liang.tang@...cle.com" <liang.tang@...cle.com>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/8] ACPI: processor: add
__acpi_processor_[un]register_driver helpers.
> From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad@...nok.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 10:26 PM
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 01:48:01PM +0800, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk [mailto:konrad.wilk@...cle.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 6:04 AM
> > >
> > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 12:20:59PM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > > From: Tang Liang <liang.tang@...cle.com>
> > > >
> > > > This patch implement __acpi_processor_[un]register_driver helper,
> > > > so we can registry override processor driver function. Specifically
> > > > the Xen processor driver.
> > >
> > > Liang,
> > >
> > > Is the reason we are doing this b/c we need to call acpi_bus_register_driver
> > > and inhibit the registration of 'acpi_processor_driver' ?
> > >
> > > And the reason we don't want 'acpi_processor_driver' to run is b/c of what?
> > > If the cpuidle is disabled what is the harm of running the
> > > 'acpi_processor_driver'
> > > driver?
> >
> > IIRC, the reason why we want a Xen specific driver is because current driver
> > is integrated with OS logic too tightly, e.g. the various checks on VCPU related
> > structures. Long time ago the 1st version in Xen was to use same driver, by
> > adding various tweaking lines inside which makes it completely messed. Then
> > later it's found that it's clearer to create a Xen specific wrapping driver, by
> > invoking some exported functions from existing one.
>
> What I am asking is does it matter "if the current driver is integrated
> with OS logic to tighly" - as it is not running anyhow (b/c cpuidle is
> disabled).
>
> And if Xen specific driver can run along-side the generic one - since
> the generic one is not doing any work (b/c cpuidle is disabled).
>
> That is what I am trying to figure out - since this patch purpose is to
> thwart the generic driver from running and allowing the xen one to run.
It's a separate issue from cpuidle case. Here we're talking about acpi processor
driver, not the acpi cpuidle driver. ACPI processor driver is responsible for
discovering ACPI processor projects, and then enumerate various methods
such as _PPC, _CST, etc. under those objects. So far this driver depends on
VCPU presence in various places, which causes trouble when dom0 is configured
with less VCPU number than physical present one.
One example you can see from acpi_processor_add:
result = acpi_processor_get_info(device); // call acpi_get_cpuid
if (result) {
/* Processor is physically not present */
return 0;
}
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
if (pr->id >= setup_max_cpus && pr->id != 0)
return 0;
#endif
BUG_ON((pr->id >= nr_cpu_ids) || (pr->id < 0));
The binding between ACPI processor objects and VCPU presence would only parse
partial objects to Xen. And there're various places within driver validating pr->id
making it messy to workaround for Xen within same driver.
That's the major reason for coming up a Xen specific driver, which always parses
all present objects regardless of VCPU presence. :-)
Thanks
Kevin
> >
> > Thanks
> > Kevin
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > By default the values are set to the native one.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tang Liang <liang.tang@...cle.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 35
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > > > include/acpi/processor.h | 6 +++++-
> > > > 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> > > > index 211c078..55f0b89 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c
> > > > @@ -90,6 +90,11 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id
> > > processor_device_ids[] = {
> > > > };
> > > > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, processor_device_ids);
> > > >
> > > > +int (*__acpi_processor_register_driver)(void) =
> > > acpi_processor_register_driver;
> > > > +void (*__acpi_processor_unregister_driver)(void) \
> > > > + = acpi_processor_unregister_driver;
> > > > +
> > > > +
> > > > static struct acpi_driver acpi_processor_driver = {
> > > > .name = "processor",
> > > > .class = ACPI_PROCESSOR_CLASS,
> > > > @@ -779,6 +784,22 @@ void
> acpi_processor_uninstall_hotplug_notify(void)
> > > > unregister_hotcpu_notifier(&acpi_cpu_notifier);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +int acpi_processor_register_driver(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + int result = 0;
> > > > +
> > > > + result = acpi_bus_register_driver(&acpi_processor_driver);
> > > > + return result;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +void acpi_processor_unregister_driver(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > + acpi_bus_unregister_driver(&acpi_processor_driver);
> > > > +
> > > > + cpuidle_unregister_driver(&acpi_idle_driver);
> > > > +
> > > > + return;
> > > > +}
> > > > /*
> > > > * We keep the driver loaded even when ACPI is not running.
> > > > * This is needed for the powernow-k8 driver, that works even without
> > > > @@ -794,9 +815,11 @@ static int __init acpi_processor_init(void)
> > > >
> > > > memset(&errata, 0, sizeof(errata));
> > > >
> > > > - result = acpi_bus_register_driver(&acpi_processor_driver);
> > > > - if (result < 0)
> > > > - return result;
> > > > + if (__acpi_processor_register_driver) {
> > > > + result = __acpi_processor_register_driver();
> > > > + if (result < 0)
> > > > + return result;
> > > > + }
> > > >
> > > > acpi_processor_install_hotplug_notify();
> > > >
> > > > @@ -809,6 +832,7 @@ static int __init acpi_processor_init(void)
> > > > return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +
> > > > static void __exit acpi_processor_exit(void)
> > > > {
> > > > if (acpi_disabled)
> > > > @@ -820,9 +844,8 @@ static void __exit acpi_processor_exit(void)
> > > >
> > > > acpi_processor_uninstall_hotplug_notify();
> > > >
> > > > - acpi_bus_unregister_driver(&acpi_processor_driver);
> > > > -
> > > > - cpuidle_unregister_driver(&acpi_idle_driver);
> > > > + if (__acpi_processor_unregister_driver)
> > > > + __acpi_processor_unregister_driver();
> > > >
> > > > return;
> > > > }
> > > > diff --git a/include/acpi/processor.h b/include/acpi/processor.h
> > > > index bd99fb6..969cbc9 100644
> > > > --- a/include/acpi/processor.h
> > > > +++ b/include/acpi/processor.h
> > > > @@ -225,6 +225,9 @@ struct acpi_processor_errata {
> > > > } piix4;
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > +extern int (*__acpi_processor_register_driver)(void);
> > > > +extern void (*__acpi_processor_unregister_driver)(void);
> > > > +
> > > > extern int acpi_processor_preregister_performance(struct
> > > > acpi_processor_performance
> > > > __percpu *performance);
> > > > @@ -242,7 +245,8 @@ int acpi_processor_notify_smm(struct module
> > > *calling_module);
> > > >
> > > > void acpi_processor_install_hotplug_notify(void);
> > > > void acpi_processor_uninstall_hotplug_notify(void);
> > > > -
> > > > +int acpi_processor_register_driver(void);
> > > > +void acpi_processor_unregister_driver(void);
> > > > int acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device);
> > > > int acpi_processor_remove(struct acpi_device *device, int type);
> > > > void acpi_processor_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event);
> > > > --
> > > > 1.7.7.3
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
--
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