linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 3/3] ARM64 LPC: LPC driver implementation on Hip06

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: <2825537.ADCNsGqGxn@wuerfel>
Date:   Wed, 09 Nov 2016 22:34:38 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>,
        Yuanzhichang <yuanzhichang@...ilicon.com>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lorenzo.pieralisi@....com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        "benh@...nel.crashing.org" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        "minyard@....org" <minyard@....org>,
        "catalin.marinas@....com" <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
        "will.deacon@....com" <will.deacon@....com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "xuwei (O)" <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>, Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "olof@...om.net" <olof@...om.net>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "zourongrong@...il.com" <zourongrong@...il.com>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "liviu.dudau@....com" <liviu.dudau@....com>,
        "kantyzc@....com" <kantyzc@....com>,
        "zhichang.yuan02@...il.com" <zhichang.yuan02@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 3/3] ARM64 LPC: LPC driver implementation on Hip06

On Wednesday, November 9, 2016 12:10:43 PM CET Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 8, 2016 11:47:09 AM CET zhichang.yuan wrote:
> > > +       /*
> > > +        * The first PCIBIOS_MIN_IO is reserved specifically for
> > indirectIO.
> > > +        * It will separate indirectIO range from pci host bridge to
> > > +        * avoid the possible PIO conflict.
> > > +        * Set the indirectIO range directly here.
> > > +        */
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.start = 0;
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.end = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO - 1;
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.devpara = lpcdev;
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.pfin = hisilpc_comm_in;
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.pfout = hisilpc_comm_out;
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.pfins = hisilpc_comm_ins;
> > > +       lpcdev->io_ops.pfouts = hisilpc_comm_outs;
> > 
> > I have to look at patch 2 in more detail again, after missing a few
> > review
> > rounds. I'm still a bit skeptical about hardcoding a logical I/O port
> > range here, and would hope that we can just go through the same
> > assignment of logical port ranges that we have for PCI buses,
> > decoupling
> > the bus addresses from the linux-internal ones.
> 
> The point here is that we want to avoid any conflict/overlap between
> the LPC I/O space and the PCI I/O space. With the assignment above
> we make sure that LPC never interfere with PCI I/O space.

But we already abstract the PCI I/O space using dynamic registration.
There is no need to hardcode the logical address for ISA, though
I think we can hardcode the bus address to start at zero here.

	Arnd