linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 4/4] net: stmmac: add MSI support for Intel Quark X1000

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: <F54AEECA5E2B9541821D670476DAE19C2B7F6612@PGSMSX102.gar.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:55:22 +0000
From:	"Kweh, Hock Leong" <hock.leong.kweh@...el.com>
To:	Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>,
	'David Miller' <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	"'peppe.cavallaro@...com'" <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
	"'rayagond@...avyalabs.com'" <rayagond@...avyalabs.com>,
	"'vbridgers2013@...il.com'" <vbridgers2013@...il.com>,
	"'srinivas.kandagatla@...com'" <srinivas.kandagatla@...com>,
	"'wens@...e.org'" <wens@...e.org>,
	"'netdev@...r.kernel.org'" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/4] net: stmmac: add MSI support for Intel Quark X1000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bryan O'Donoghue [mailto:pure.logic@...us-software.ie]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 7:29 PM
> Hi Wilson.
> 
> Seeing you post now on the PCI emumeration suggestion from Dave Miller I
> see
> 
> I wasn't copied on this https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/27/190 thread so can
> only respond now....
> 
> What's missing from your MSI enabling code is the PVM mask/unmask
> required on the Quark X1000 bridge - for *all* downstream devices using MSI.
> 
> I realise it's not an upstreaming friendly piece of code - however - without
> the PVM mask operation all MSIs on Quark should be considered unreliable.
> 
> Maybe you guys have submitted patches to the PCI layer on this already ?
> If so feel free to ignore.
> 
> If not then please re-evaluate all MSI enabling code.
> 
>  From the original
> 
> http://downloadmirror.intel.com/23171/eng/Board_Support_Package_Sour
> ces_for_Intel_Quark_v1.0.0.7z
> 
> +#if defined(CONFIG_INTEL_QUARK_X1000_SOC)
> +	#define mask_pvm(x) qrk_pci_pvm_mask(x)
> +	#define unmask_pvm(x) qrk_pci_pvm_unmask(x) #else
> +	#define mask_pvm(x)
> +	#define unmask_pvm(x)
> +#endif
> +
>   static irqreturn_t stmmac_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>   {
>   	struct net_device *dev = (struct net_device *)dev_id; @@ -1601,10
> +1686,12 @@ static irqreturn_t stmmac_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
>   		return IRQ_NONE;
>   	}
> 
> +	mask_pvm(priv->pdev);
> +
>   	/* To handle GMAC own interrupts */
>   	if (priv->plat->has_gmac) {
> -		int status = priv->hw->mac->host_irq_status((void __iomem
> *)
> -							    dev->base_addr);
> +		int status = priv->hw->mac->host_irq_status(priv);
> +
>   		if (unlikely(status)) {
>   			if (status & core_mmc_tx_irq)
>   				priv->xstats.mmc_tx_irq_n++;
> @@ -1634,6 +1721,8 @@ static irqreturn_t stmmac_interrupt(int irq, void
> *dev_id)
>   	/* To handle DMA interrupts */
>   	stmmac_dma_interrupt(priv);
> 
> +	unmask_pvm(priv->pdev);
> +
>   	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>   }

Hi Bryan,

The MSI masking is already implemented in the MSI framework: http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/pci/msi.c#L181.
I don't see a reason to upstream a local set implementation to Ethernet subsystem.
Thanks.


Regards,
Wilson

--
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/