| 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: <5769E93F.7020809@samsung.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 10:26:23 +0900
From: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>
To: Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>
Cc: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 1/1] mmc: dw_mmc: Wait for data transfer after
response errors.
Hi Enric,
On 06/22/2016 01:30 AM, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:
> Hi Jaehoon,
>
> 2016-06-20 12:14 GMT+02:00 Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>:
>> Hi Enric,
>>
>> On 04/26/2016 05:03 PM, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>> From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
>>>
>>> According to the DesignWare state machine description, after we get a
>>> "response error" or "response CRC error" we move into data transfer
>>> mode. That means that we don't necessarily need to special case
>>> trying to deal with the failure right away. We can wait until we are
>>> notified that the data transfer is complete (with or without errors)
>>> and then we can deal with the failure.
>>>
>>> It may sound strange to defer dealing with a command that we know will
>>> fail anyway, but this appears to fix a bug. During tuning (CMD19) on
>>> a specific card on an rk3288-based system, we found that we could get
>>> a "response CRC error". Sending the stop command after the "response
>>> CRC error" would then throw the system into a confused state causing
>>> all future tuning phases to report failure.
>>
>> I understood this patch what purpose has.
>> Does it need to consider for other tuning cases?
>>
>
> Not sure, to be honest I only saw this during UHS tuning sequence on
> this brand of cards I never reproduced the issue on other tuning
> cases.
>
>> Best Regards,
>> Jaehoon Chung
>>
>>>
>>> When in the confused state, the controller would show these (hex codes
>>> are interrupt status register):
>>> CMD ERR: 0x00000046 (cmd=19)
>>> CMD ERR: 0x0000004e (cmd=12)
>>> DATA ERR: 0x00000208
>>> DATA ERR: 0x0000020c
>>> CMD ERR: 0x00000104 (cmd=19)
>>> CMD ERR: 0x00000104 (cmd=12)
>>> DATA ERR: 0x00000208
>>> DATA ERR: 0x0000020c
>>> ...
>>> ...
>>>
>>> It is inherently difficult to deal with the complexity of trying to
>>> correctly send a stop command while a data transfer is taking place
>>> since you need to deal with different corner cases caused by the fact
>>> that the data transfer could complete (with errors or without errors)
>>> during various places in sending the stop command (dw_mci_stop_dma,
>>> send_stop_abort, etc)
>>>
>>> Instead of adding a bunch of extra complexity to deal with this, it
>>> seems much simpler to just use the more straightforward (and less
>>> error-prone) path of letting the data transfer finish. There
>>> shouldn't be any huge benefit to sending the stop command slightly
>>> earlier, anyway.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
>>> Cc: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...il.com>
Applied this patch on my repository. Thanks!
Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung
>>> ---
>>> Changelog since v1:
>>> - Fix the issue found by Alim with exynos letting the data transfer
>>> take place only when MMC_SEND_TUNING_BLOCK is issued.
>>>
>>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> index 242f9a0..2ebeea8 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> @@ -1761,6 +1761,33 @@ static void dw_mci_tasklet_func(unsigned long priv)
>>> }
>>>
>>> if (cmd->data && err) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * During UHS tuning sequence, sending the stop
>>> + * command after the response CRC error would
>>> + * throw the system into a confused state
>>> + * causing all future tuning phases to report
>>> + * failure.
>>> + *
>>> + * In such case controller will move into a data
>>> + * transfer state after a response error or
>>> + * response CRC error. Let's let that finish
>>> + * before trying to send a stop, so we'll go to
>>> + * STATE_SENDING_DATA.
>>> + *
>>> + * Although letting the data transfer take place
>>> + * will waste a bit of time (we already know
>>> + * the command was bad), it can't cause any
>>> + * errors since it's possible it would have
>>> + * taken place anyway if this tasklet got
>>> + * delayed. Allowing the transfer to take place
>>> + * avoids races and keeps things simple.
>>> + */
>>> + if ((err != -ETIMEDOUT) &&
>>> + (cmd->opcode == MMC_SEND_TUNING_BLOCK)) {
>>> + state = STATE_SENDING_DATA;
>>> + continue;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> dw_mci_stop_dma(host);
>>> send_stop_abort(host, data);
>>> state = STATE_SENDING_STOP;
>>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists