| 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: <20141023053555.GC11770@google.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 23:35:55 -0600
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
Cc: 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>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
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>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu@...au.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/27] arm/MSI: Save MSI chip in pci_sys_data
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 11:06:52AM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote:
> Saving msi chip in pci_sys_data can make pci bus and
> devices don't need to know msi chip detail, it also
> make pci enumeration code be decoupled from msi chip.
> In fact, all pci devices under the same pci hostbridge
> share same msi chip. So msi chip should be seen as one
> of resources or attributes to be initialized in pci host
> bridge driver. Currently, pci hostbridge drivers create
> pci_host_bridge in pci_create_root_bus(), and pass arch
> specific pci sysdata to core pci scan functions. So pci
> arch sysdata is good place to save msi chip.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm/include/asm/mach/pci.h | 6 ++++++
> arch/arm/include/asm/pci.h | 9 +++++++++
> arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c | 3 +++
> drivers/pci/msi.c | 6 ++++++
> include/linux/pci.h | 9 +++++++++
> 5 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/pci.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/pci.h
> index 7fc4278..59b0d87 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/pci.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/pci.h
> @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ struct hw_pci {
> #ifdef CONFIG_PCI_DOMAINS
> int domain;
> #endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> + struct msi_chip *msi_chip;
> +#endif
> struct pci_ops *ops;
> int nr_controllers;
> void **private_data;
> @@ -47,6 +50,9 @@ struct pci_sys_data {
> #ifdef CONFIG_PCI_DOMAINS
> int domain;
> #endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> + struct msi_chip *msi_chip;
> +#endif
> struct list_head node;
> int busnr; /* primary bus number */
> u64 mem_offset; /* bus->cpu memory mapping offset */
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/pci.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/pci.h
> index 7e95d85..b562c09 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/pci.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/pci.h
> @@ -31,6 +31,15 @@ static inline int pci_proc_domain(struct pci_bus *bus)
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_PCI_DOMAINS */
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> +static inline struct msi_chip *pci_msi_chip(struct pci_bus *bus)
> +{
> + struct pci_sys_data *root = bus->sysdata;
> +
> + return root->msi_chip;
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * The PCI address space does equal the physical memory address space.
> * The networking and block device layers use this boolean for bounce
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c b/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c
> index 17a26c1..a19038d 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c
> @@ -471,6 +471,9 @@ static void pcibios_init_hw(struct device *parent, struct hw_pci *hw,
> #ifdef CONFIG_PCI_DOMAINS
> sys->domain = hw->domain;
> #endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> + sys->msi_chip = hw->msi_chip;
> +#endif
> sys->busnr = busnr;
> sys->swizzle = hw->swizzle;
> sys->map_irq = hw->map_irq;
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> index 22e413c..f11108c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,9 @@ int __weak arch_setup_msi_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, struct msi_desc *desc)
> struct msi_chip *chip = dev->bus->msi;
> int err;
>
> + if (!chip)
> + chip = pci_msi_chip(dev->bus);
> +
> if (!chip || !chip->setup_irq)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> @@ -50,6 +53,9 @@ void __weak arch_teardown_msi_irq(unsigned int irq)
> struct msi_desc *entry = irq_get_msi_desc(irq);
> struct msi_chip *chip = entry->dev->bus->msi;
>
> + if (!chip)
> + chip = pci_msi_chip(entry->dev->bus);
> +
> if (!chip || !chip->teardown_irq)
> return;
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index 9cd2721..7a48b40 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -1433,6 +1433,15 @@ static inline int pci_get_new_domain_nr(void) { return -ENOSYS; }
>
> #include <asm/pci.h>
>
> +/* Just avoid compile error, will be clean up later */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> +
> +#ifndef pci_msi_chip
> +#define pci_msi_chip(bus) NULL
> +#endif
> +#endif
I don't like the mixture of ARM changes and PCI core changes in the same
patch. Can you split this into a core patch that does something like this:
struct msi_chip * __weak pcibios_msi_controller(struct pci_bus *bus)
{
return NULL;
}
struct msi_chip *pci_msi_controller(struct pci_bus *bus)
{
msi_chip *controller = bus->msi;
if (controller)
return controller;
return pcibios_msi_controller(bus);
}
followed by an ARM patch that puts the msi_chip pointer in struct hw_pci
and implements pcibios_msi_controller()?
I know you're trying to *remove* weak functions, and this adds one, but
this section of the series is more about getting rid of the ARM
pcibios_add_bus() because all it was used for was setting the bus->msi
pointer.
Eventually we might have a way to stash an MSI controller pointer in the
generic pci_host_bridge struct, and then the pcibios_msi_controller()
interface could go away.
> +
> /* these helpers provide future and backwards compatibility
> * for accessing popular PCI BAR info */
> #define pci_resource_start(dev, bar) ((dev)->resource[(bar)].start)
> --
> 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