| 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: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:33:46 -0400
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Xinwei Hu <huxinwei@...wei.com>,
Wuyun <wuyun.wu@...wei.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, arnab.basu@...escale.com,
Bharat.Bhushan@...escale.com, x86@...nel.org,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...era.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] x86/xen/MSI: Eliminate arch_msix_mask_irq() and
arch_msi_mask_irq()
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 11:14:14AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote:
> Commit 0e4ccb150 added two __weak arch functions arch_msix_mask_irq()
> and arch_msi_mask_irq() to fix a bug found when running xen in x86.
> Introduced these two funcntions make MSI code complex. And mask/unmask
"These two functions made the MSI code more complex."
> is the irq actions related to interrupt controller, should not use
> weak arch functions to override mask/unmask interfaces. This patch
I am bit baffled of what you are saying.
> reverted commit 0e4ccb150 and export struct irq_chip msi_chip, modify
> msi_chip->irq_mask/irq_unmask() in xen init functions to fix this
> bug for simplicity. Also this is preparation for using struct
> msi_chip instead of weak arch MSI functions in all platforms.
> Keep default_msi_mask_irq() and default_msix_mask_irq() in
> linux/msi.h to make s390 MSI code compile happy, they wiil be removed
s/wiil/will.
> in the later patch.
>
> Tested-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
I don't even remember testing it - I guess I did the earlier version.
So a couple of questions since I've totally forgotten about this:
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> index 50f67a3..5f8f3af 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ static inline __attribute_const__ u32 msi_mask(unsigned x)
> * reliably as devices without an INTx disable bit will then generate a
> * level IRQ which will never be cleared.
> */
> -u32 default_msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> +u32 __msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> {
> u32 mask_bits = desc->masked;
>
> @@ -176,14 +176,9 @@ u32 default_msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> return mask_bits;
> }
>
> -__weak u32 arch_msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> -{
> - return default_msi_mask_irq(desc, mask, flag);
> -}
> -
> static void msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> {
> - desc->masked = arch_msi_mask_irq(desc, mask, flag);
> + desc->masked = __msi_mask_irq(desc, mask, flag);
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -193,7 +188,7 @@ static void msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> * file. This saves a few milliseconds when initialising devices with lots
> * of MSI-X interrupts.
> */
> -u32 default_msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag)
> +u32 __msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag)
> {
> u32 mask_bits = desc->masked;
> unsigned offset = desc->msi_attrib.entry_nr * PCI_MSIX_ENTRY_SIZE +
> @@ -206,14 +201,9 @@ u32 default_msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag)
> return mask_bits;
> }
>
> -__weak u32 arch_msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag)
> -{
> - return default_msix_mask_irq(desc, flag);
> -}
> -
> static void msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag)
> {
> - desc->masked = arch_msix_mask_irq(desc, flag);
> + desc->masked = __msix_mask_irq(desc, flag);
> }
>
> static void msi_set_mask_bit(struct irq_data *data, u32 flag)
> @@ -852,7 +842,7 @@ void pci_msi_shutdown(struct pci_dev *dev)
> /* Return the device with MSI unmasked as initial states */
> mask = msi_mask(desc->msi_attrib.multi_cap);
> /* Keep cached state to be restored */
> - arch_msi_mask_irq(desc, mask, ~mask);
> + __msi_mask_irq(desc, mask, ~mask);
If I am reading this right, it will call the old 'default_msi_mask_irq'
which is exactly what we don't want to do under Xen. We want to call
the NOP code.
>
> /* Restore dev->irq to its default pin-assertion irq */
> dev->irq = desc->msi_attrib.default_irq;
> @@ -950,7 +940,7 @@ void pci_msix_shutdown(struct pci_dev *dev)
> /* Return the device with MSI-X masked as initial states */
> list_for_each_entry(entry, &dev->msi_list, list) {
> /* Keep cached states to be restored */
> - arch_msix_mask_irq(entry, 1);
> + __msix_mask_irq(entry, 1);
Ditto here.
Looking more at this code I have to retract my Reviewed-by and Tested-by
on the whole series.
Is it possible to get a git tree for this please?
> }
>
> msix_clear_and_set_ctrl(dev, PCI_MSIX_FLAGS_ENABLE, 0);
> diff --git a/include/linux/msi.h b/include/linux/msi.h
> index 45ef8cb..cc46a62 100644
> --- a/include/linux/msi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/msi.h
> @@ -19,6 +19,8 @@ void read_msi_msg(struct msi_desc *entry, struct msi_msg *msg);
> void get_cached_msi_msg(struct msi_desc *entry, struct msi_msg *msg);
> void __write_msi_msg(struct msi_desc *entry, struct msi_msg *msg);
> void write_msi_msg(unsigned int irq, struct msi_msg *msg);
> +u32 __msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag);
> +u32 __msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag);
>
> struct msi_desc {
> struct {
> @@ -59,8 +61,8 @@ void arch_restore_msi_irqs(struct pci_dev *dev);
>
> void default_teardown_msi_irqs(struct pci_dev *dev);
> void default_restore_msi_irqs(struct pci_dev *dev);
> -u32 default_msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag);
> -u32 default_msix_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 flag);
> +#define default_msi_mask_irq __msi_mask_irq
> +#define default_msix_mask_irq __msix_mask_irq
>
> struct msi_chip {
> struct module *owner;
> --
> 1.7.1
>
--
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