linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] bmips: add BCM6358 support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <569D7D69.6070807@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:03:53 -0800
From:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:	Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	jogo@...nwrt.org, cernekee@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bmips: add BCM6358 support

Le 18/01/2016 01:42, Álvaro Fernández Rojas a écrit :
> I can refine it to support a custom offset for each cpu instead of a generic one, but defining a custom offset for new SoCs such as BCM6368 or BCM6328 would actually break them, since that way the address wouldn't be remapped to 0xb0000000.
> See: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/mips/include/asm/io.h#L213
> In those CPUs the remapping is done automatically (from 0x10000000 to 0xb0000000), since the registers are located in the low 512MB of address space (0x1fffffffULL).

I see what you mean by that now, we can indeed drop these registers from
plat_ioremap() since the fallback already takes care of that for us.

> 
> However, the older CPUs such as BCM6358 (or BCM3368) need that custom ioremap, since those registers aren't located in the low 512MB of address space.
> If you want, I can do something like this: https://gist.github.com/Noltari/bc5fe029c52cf053a454
> And after that we could add other CPUs such as the BCM3368, which needs a different offset: "{ "brcm,bcm3368", 0xfff80000 }"
> 
> What do you think? Should we keep a generic offset (0xfff00000) or should we add SoC specific compatible strings with each custom offset?
> 
> Regards,
> Álvaro.
> 
>> El 18 ene 2016, a las 7:49, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> escribió:
>>
>>> On January 17, 2016 3:28:20 AM PST, "Álvaro Fernández Rojas" <noltari@...il.com> wrote:
>>> BCM6358 has a shared TLB which conflicts with current SMP support, so
>>> it must
>>> be disabled for now.
>>> BCM6358 uses >= 0xfff00000 addresses for internal registers, which need
>>> to be
>>> remapped (by using a simplified version of BRCM63xx ioremap.h).
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@...il.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/mips/bmips/setup.c                    | 10 +++++++++
>>> arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bmips/ioremap.h | 33
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>>> create mode 100644 arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bmips/ioremap.h
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/mips/bmips/setup.c b/arch/mips/bmips/setup.c
>>> index 3553528..38b5bd5 100644
>>> --- a/arch/mips/bmips/setup.c
>>> +++ b/arch/mips/bmips/setup.c
>>> @@ -95,6 +95,15 @@ static void bcm6328_quirks(void)
>>>        bcm63xx_fixup_cpu1();
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static void bcm6358_quirks(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    /*
>>> +     * BCM6358 needs special handling for its shared TLB, so
>>> +     * disable SMP for now
>>> +     */
>>> +    bmips_smp_enabled = 0;
>>> +}
>>
>> That part looks good.
>>
>>> +
>>> static void bcm6368_quirks(void)
>>> {
>>>    bcm63xx_fixup_cpu1();
>>> @@ -104,6 +113,7 @@ static const struct bmips_quirk bmips_quirk_list[]
>>> = {
>>>    { "brcm,bcm3384-viper",        &bcm3384_viper_quirks        },
>>>    { "brcm,bcm33843-viper",    &bcm3384_viper_quirks        },
>>>    { "brcm,bcm6328",        &bcm6328_quirks            },
>>> +    { "brcm,bcm6358",        &bcm6358_quirks            },
>>>    { "brcm,bcm6368",        &bcm6368_quirks            },
>>>    { "brcm,bcm63168",        &bcm6368_quirks            },
>>>    { },
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> +
>>> +static inline int is_bmips_internal_registers(phys_addr_t offset)
>>> +{
>>> +    if (offset >= 0xfff00000)
>>> +        return 1;
>>> +
>>> +    return 0;
>>
>> That should probably be refined to be looking at the SoC/CPU you are running on, using eventually of_machine_is_compatible on the SoC-specific compatible string. For instance, on 6368 and newer, the physical register offset moves to PA 0x1000_0000.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -- 
>> Florian


-- 
Florian