linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI/MSI: Add pci_enable_msi

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: <1404792090.26459.1.camel@concordia>
Date:	Tue, 08 Jul 2014 14:01:30 +1000
From:	Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc:	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...hat.com>, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI/MSI: Add pci_enable_msi_partial()

On Wed, 2014-07-02 at 14:22 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:10:30PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> > There are PCI devices that require a particular value written
> > to the Multiple Message Enable (MME) register while aligned on
> > power of 2 boundary value of actually used MSI vectors 'nvec'
> > is a lesser of that MME value:
> > 
> > 	roundup_pow_of_two(nvec) < 'Multiple Message Enable'
> > 
> > However the existing pci_enable_msi_block() interface is not
> > able to configure such devices, since the value written to the
> > MME register is calculated from the number of requested MSIs
> > 'nvec':
> > 
> > 	'Multiple Message Enable' = roundup_pow_of_two(nvec)
> 
> For MSI, software learns how many vectors a device requests by reading
> the Multiple Message Capable (MMC) field.  This field is encoded, so a
> device can only request 1, 2, 4, 8, etc., vectors.  It's impossible
> for a device to request 3 vectors; it would have to round up that up
> to a power of two and request 4 vectors.
> 
> Software writes similarly encoded values to MME to tell the device how
> many vectors have been allocated for its use.  For example, it's
> impossible to tell the device that it can use 3 vectors; the OS has to
> round that up and tell the device it can use 4 vectors.
> 
> So if I understand correctly, the point of this series is to take
> advantage of device-specific knowledge, e.g., the device requests 4
> vectors via MMC, but we "know" the device is only capable of using 3.
> Moreover, we tell the device via MME that 4 vectors are available, but
> we've only actually set up 3 of them.
> 
> This makes me uneasy because we're lying to the device, and the device
> is perfectly within spec to use all 4 of those vectors.  If anything
> changes the number of vectors the device uses (new device revision,
> firmware upgrade, etc.), this is liable to break.

It also adds more complexity into the already complex MSI API, across all
architectures, all so a single Intel chipset can save a couple of MSIs. That
seems like the wrong trade off to me.

cheers


--
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/