linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 1/3] ARM64 LPC: Indirect ISA port IO introduced

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: <79d73f93-1cf8-19db-ca5c-8fb6257edd6c@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Nov 2016 12:58:28 +0000
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "zhichang.yuan" <yuanzhichang@...ilicon.com>
CC:     <catalin.marinas@....com>, <will.deacon@....com>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <olof@...om.net>,
        <arnd@...db.de>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        <minyard@....org>, <liviu.dudau@....com>, <zourongrong@...il.com>,
        <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>, <zhichang.yuan02@...il.com>,
        <kantyzc@....com>, <xuwei5@...ilicon.com>, <marc.zyngier@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/3] ARM64 LPC: Indirect ISA port IO introduced

On 08/11/2016 23:16, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-11-08 at 12:03 +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 11:47:07AM +0800, zhichang.yuan wrote:
>>>
>>> For arm64, there is no I/O space as other architectural platforms, such as
>>> X86. Most I/O accesses are achieved based on MMIO. But for some arm64 SoCs,
>>> such as Hip06, when accessing some legacy ISA devices connected to LPC, those
>>> known port addresses are used to control the corresponding target devices, for
>>> example, 0x2f8 is for UART, 0xe4 is for ipmi-bt. It is different from the
>>> normal MMIO mode in using.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with arm64. Hardware with this kind of indirect
>> bus access could be integrated with a variety of CPU architectures. It
>> simply hasn't been, yet.
>
> On some ppc's we also use similar indirect access methods for IOs. We
> have a generic infrastructure for re-routing some memory or IO regions
> to hooks.
>
> On POWER8, our PCIe doesn't do IO at all, but we have an LPC bus behind
> firmware calls ;-) We use that infrastructure to plumb in the LPC bus.
>
Hi,

I would like to mention another topic on supporting LPC, and this is 
regard to eSPI support.
eSPI is seen as the successor for LPC, and some BMCs already support it.

I had a chat with Arnd on this, and the idea to model LPC as a SPI bus 
adpater (and also eSPI).

However it seems to me that most platforms will/should support eSPI as a 
transparent bridge, same as LPC on x86. So I don't think that this is 
much point in modelling LPC/eSPI as a bus.

So we shall continue with indriect-IO support...

Thanks,
John