linux-kernel - Re: Using DT overlays for adding virtual hardware

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: <EA3C5627-67A4-4120-BA56-D563F2D91CF8@konsulko.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:35:26 +0300
From:	Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>
To:	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jailhouse <jailhouse-dev@...glegroups.com>,
	Måns Rullgård <mans@...x.de>,
	Antonios Motakis <antonios.motakis@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: Using DT overlays for adding virtual hardware

Hi Jan,

> On Jun 21, 2016, at 14:22 , Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2016-06-21 12:24, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
>> Hi Jan,
>> 
>>> On Jun 21, 2016, at 13:13 , Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi Pantelis,
>>> 
>>> coming back to this topic:
>>> 
>>> On 2016-06-09 08:03, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> OK, trial and error, and some interesting insights: I've played with DT
>>>> fragments and the overlay configfs patch of Pantelis [1] to have a
>>>> convenient start. Interestingly, I wasn't able to load a fragment that
>>>> followed the format specification for overlays ("Failed to resolve
>>>> tree"). By chance, I got this one working:
>>>> 
>>>> /dts-v1/;
>>>> / {
>>>> 	fragment {
>>>> 		target-path = "/soc@...00000";
>>>> 		__overlay__ {
>>>> 			#address-cells = <2>;
>>>> 			#size-cells = <2>;
>>>> 
>>>> 			vpci@...000000 {
>>>> 				compatible = "pci-host-cam-generic";
>>>> 				device_type = "pci";
>>>> 				#address-cells = <3>;
>>>> 				#size-cells = <2>;
>>>> 				reg = <0 0x2000000 0 0x1000000>;
>>>> 				ranges =
>>>> 					<0x02000000 0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x30000000>;
>>>> 			};
>>>> 		};
>>>> 	};
>>>> };
>>>> 
>>>> It successfully makes a BananaPi kernel add a pci host with the
>>>> specified config space and MMIO window.
>>>> 
>>>> [   81.619583] PCI host bridge /soc@...00000/vpci@...000000 ranges:
>>>> [   81.619610]   No bus range found for /soc@...00000/vpci@...000000, using [bus 00-ff]
>>>> [   81.619634]   MEM 0x10000000..0x3fffffff -> 0x10000000
>>>> [   81.620482] pci-host-generic 2000000.vpci: ECAM at [mem 0x02000000-0x02ffffff] for [bus 00-ff]
>>>> [   81.620779] pci-host-generic 2000000.vpci: PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00
>>>> [   81.620801] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [bus 00-ff]
>>>> [   81.620814] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x10000000-0x3fffffff]
>>>> [   81.620851] PCI: bus0: Fast back to back transfers enabled
>>>> 
>>>> So, no /plugin/ statement, no phandles resolution. This format even
>>>> builds with the in-kernel dtc. Any explanations? Does the code make
>>>> sense (at least it builds without warnings)?
>>>> 
>>>> Now I need to back this with some code in Jailhouse.
>>> 
>>> Meanwhile I got a virtual PCI device recognized by Linux when running
>>> over Jailhouse. However, my hack above doesn't get me to proper
>>> interrupt mapping yet. This is what I was trying with upstream dtc:
>>> 
>>> /dts-v1/;
>>> / {
>>> 	compatible = "lemaker,bananapi", "allwinner,sun7i-a20";
>>> 
>>> 	fragment@0 {
>>> 		target-path = "/soc@...00000";
>>> 		__overlay__ {
>>> 			#address-cells = <2>;
>>> 			#size-cells = <2>;
>>> 
>>> 			vpci@...0000 {
>>> 				compatible = "pci-host-ecam-generic";
>>> 				device_type = "pci";
>>> 				bus-range = <0 0>;
>>> 				#address-cells = <3>;
>>> 				#size-cells = <2>;
>>> 				#interrupt-cells = <1>;
>>> 				interrupt-map-mask = <0 0 0 7>;
>>> 				interrupt-map = <0 0 0 1 &gic 0 0 0 123 4>,
>>> 						<0 0 0 2 &gic 0 0 0 124 4>,
>>> 						<0 0 0 3 &gic 0 0 0 125 4>,
>>> 						<0 0 0 4 &gic 0 0 0 126 4>;
>>> 				reg = <0 0x2000000 0 0x100000>;
>>> 				ranges =
>>> 					<0x02000000 0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x10000000 0x00 0x30000000>;
>>> 			};
>>> 		};
>>> 	};
>>> 
>>> 	gic: fragment@1 {
>>> 		target-path = "/soc@...00000/interrupt-controller@...81000";
>>> 		__overlay__ {
>>> 		};
>>> 	};
>>> };
>>> 
>> 
>> ^ This is not going to work: You need the reference to the real gic not the empty fragment
>> here that has a target there.
>> 
>> You need to compile with the correct dtc, and you also need to compile the base dts
>> with dtc too, using the -@ flag. You can hack around it by adding something like
>> 
>> __symbols__ {
>> 	gic = "/soc@...00000/interrupt-controller@...81000”;
>> };
>> 
>> But you really need the __symbols__ node of the base dts generated by the dtc proper cause
>> the above is a dirty hack.
>> 
> 
> OK, re-building the kernel with DTC="/your/dtc -@", thus building the
> base dtb with symbols, fixes proper overlay format loading.
> 
> However, no luck yet with the interrupt topic - maybe a different issue.
> Digging deeper…
> 
Remove the gic: fragment and build both the kernel and the overlay with the -@ option.
That’s what makes it not to work.


> Thanks,
> Jan
> 
> -- 
> Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE
> Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux