| 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: <20141118144819.GK12037@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 14:48:19 +0000
From: Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Liviu Dudau <liviu@...au.co.uk>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"huxinwei@...wei.com" <huxinwei@...wei.com>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
"linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Wuyun <wuyun.wu@...wei.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/16] PCI: Separate pci_host_bridge creation out of
pci_create_root_bus()
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 08:32:26AM +0000, Yijing Wang wrote:
>
> >> +LIST_HEAD(pci_host_bridge_list);
> >> +DECLARE_RWSEM(pci_host_bridge_sem);
> >
> > Unless the pci_host_bridge_sem is accessed thousands of times per second,
> > it's normally better to use a simple mutex instead.
>
> OK, I will use simple mutex instead.
>
> >
> >> +static struct resource busn_resource = {
> >> + .name = "PCI busn",
> >> + .start = 0,
> >> + .end = 255,
> >> + .flags = IORESOURCE_BUS,
> >> +};
> >
> > I think it would be better to require callers to pass the bus resource
> > down to the function.
>
> Hmm, I think most of caller will provide the bus resource, but some others
> will not give any bus resource, extremely, no any resources :(. But we still
> need properly configure their resources for compatibility.
>
> >
> >> +struct pci_host_bridge *pci_create_host_bridge(
> >> + struct device *parent, u32 db,
> >> + struct pci_ops *ops, void *sysdata,
> >> + struct list_head *resources)
> >> +{
> >
> > Do we still need to pass the 'sysdata' in here? If we are guaranteed to
> > have a device pointer, we should always be able to get the driver
> > private data from dev_get_drvdata(host->dev->parent).
>
> We need, some platforms pass NULL pointer as host bridge parent.
Yijing,
May I suggest a different approach here? Rather than having to pass an opaque
pointer that gets converted by the host bridge driver back to the private
structure, what about promoting a new style of usage, that is similar to the
way device drivers work? Lets try to promote the embedding of the generic
pci_host_bridge structure in the host bridge specific structure! Then we can
access the private data doing container_of().
Something like this:
struct pci_controller {
struct pci_host_bridge bridge;
/* private host bridge data here */
.....
};
#define PCI_CONTROLLER(bus) ({
struct pci_host_bridge *hb = to_pci_host_bridge(bus->bridge); \
container_of(hb, struct pci_controller, bridge); })
Then we can retrieve the host bridge structure from everywhere we have a device.
Best regards,
Liviu
>
> >
> >> + host = kzalloc(sizeof(*host), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> + if (!host)
> >> + return NULL;
> >
> > devm_kzalloc maybe?
>
> I don't know much detail about devm_kzalloc(), but we have no pci host driver
> here, and I found no devm_kzalloc() uses in core PCI code before.
>
> >
> >> + if (!resources) {
> >> + /* Use default IO/MEM/BUS resources*/
> >> + pci_add_resource(&host->windows, &ioport_resource);
> >> + pci_add_resource(&host->windows, &iomem_resource);
> >> + pci_add_resource(&host->windows, &busn_resource);
> >> + } else {
> >> + list_for_each_entry_safe(window, n, resources, list)
> >> + list_move_tail(&window->list, &host->windows);
> >> + }
> >
> > I think we should assume that the correct resources are passed. You
> > could add a wrapper around this function to convert old platforms
> > though.
>
> OK, I will move these code out of pci_create_host_bridge, and add a wrapper
> to setup the default resources.
>
> >
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_create_host_bridge);
> >
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() maybe?
>
> OK, will update it.
>
> >
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> >> index 8b11b38..daa7f40 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> >> @@ -402,7 +402,12 @@ struct pci_host_bridge_window {
> >> struct pci_host_bridge {
> >> struct device dev;
> >> struct pci_bus *bus; /* root bus */
> >> + struct list_head list;
> >> struct list_head windows; /* pci_host_bridge_windows */
> >> + int busnum;
> >
> > The busnum should already be implied through the bus resource.
>
> Yes, I will consider remove it and introduce a helper function to get the root bus number, thanks!
>
> Thanks!
> Yijing.
>
> >
> > Arnd
> >
> > .
> >
>
>
> --
> Thanks!
> Yijing
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
====================
| I would like to |
| fix the world, |
| but they're not |
| giving me the |
\ source code! /
---------------
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
--
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