linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: NI 169445 board 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]

Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2017 18:45:26 +0000
From:   Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
To:     Nathan Sullivan <nathan.sullivan@...com>,
        Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>
CC:     Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lars Persson <larper@...s.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: NI 169445 board support

Às 6:44 PM de 1/5/2017, Nathan Sullivan escreveu:
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 06:33:53PM +0000, Joao Pinto wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Às 6:28 PM de 1/5/2017, Niklas Cassel escreveu:
>>> On 01/04/2017 05:38 PM, Nathan Sullivan wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 05:34:34PM +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 09:42:09AM -0600, Nathan Sullivan wrote:
>>>>>> Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2016 09:42:09 -0600
>>>>>> From: Nathan Sullivan <nathan.sullivan@...com>
>>>>>> To: ralf@...ux-mips.org, mark.rutland@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org
>>>>>> CC: linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
>>>>>>  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nathan Sullivan <nathan.sullivan@...com>
>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] MIPS: NI 169445 board support
>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Support the National Instruments 169445 board.
>>>>> Nathan,
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume you're going to repost the changes Rob asked for in
>>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__patchwork.linux-2Dmips.org_patch_14641_-2326924&d=DgICaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=s2fO0hii0OGNOv9qQy_HRXy-xAJUD1NNoEcc3io_kx0&m=5p7f9dIkvVVK4UFHimMpezq5NwIJfUpd08c-Zk4_c6c&s=_JwSwe4VFYtxV1tcYt6Z8r4hJX0xfoGhCixygUxlg5s&e=  and resubmit?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>   Ralf
>>>> Hmm, I found the issue with the generic MIPS config and dwc_eth_qos.  The NIC
>>>> driver attempts to cache align a descriptor ring using the ___cacheline_aligned
>>>> attribute on the descriptor struct, in combination with a "skip" feature in
>>>> hardware.  However, the skip feature only has a three bit field, and the generic
>>>> MIPS config selects MIPS_L1_CACHE_SHIFT_7.  So, the line size is 128, and with a
>>>> 64-bit bus, that means the NIC descriptor skip field would need to be set to
>>>> 14 to align the 16-byte descriptors...
>>>>
>>>> I guess it makes sense for a generic MIPS kernel to align everything for 128 byte
>>>> cache lines, and for me to fix the dwc_eth_qos driver to handle cases where the
>>>> line size is too big for the hardware skip feature, right?
>>>
>>> I don't know if you've been following the discussion regarding
>>> dwc_eth_qos on netdev, but Joao Pinto from Synopsys is
>>> planning on removing the driver (since the stmmac driver
>>> now supports the same version of the IP, together with older
>>> versions of the IP).
>>>
>>> Since device tree bindings are treated as an ABI,
>>> Joao has implemented a glue layer for stmmac that parses
>>> the dwc_eth_qos binding, but uses stmmac under the hood.
>>>
>>> You can use any of the bindings, but since the dwc_eth_qos
>>> binding will be marked as deprecated, you might want to
>>> consider moving to the stmmac binding.
>>
>> A patch set to port dwc_eth_qos to stmmac is at this moment under review:
>>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_patch_711428_&d=DgIDAw&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=s2fO0hii0OGNOv9qQy_HRXy-xAJUD1NNoEcc3io_kx0&m=E0wkLvWGNBx49Zdq7Jw5toxfcwI9r7MBBbcTea28AL0&s=P71GK8K8tyGjenB4tDVyKfCuZF9cZiFBBpdeX8PQtEM&e= 
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_patch_711438_&d=DgIDAw&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=s2fO0hii0OGNOv9qQy_HRXy-xAJUD1NNoEcc3io_kx0&m=E0wkLvWGNBx49Zdq7Jw5toxfcwI9r7MBBbcTea28AL0&s=fj787JEefx7cddQAe7g604tMtvDlVzYj3kQKy80Gym0&e= 
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__patchwork.ozlabs.org_patch_711439_&d=DgIDAw&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=s2fO0hii0OGNOv9qQy_HRXy-xAJUD1NNoEcc3io_kx0&m=E0wkLvWGNBx49Zdq7Jw5toxfcwI9r7MBBbcTea28AL0&s=Cyy9ySM6LNgkQ07OsIYE8KnD1h1DruhCKLxH6W3_1VY&e= 
>>
>> Niklas has tested it and it works well, so after the patches are upstreamed the
>> dwc_eth_qos will be removed as agreed with Lars.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
> 
> Thanks for the heads up, I'll wait, adjust my bindings and retest then.

Great! Thanks!

> 
>    Nathan
> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>    Nathan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>