| 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: <e8a50bf0-edab-db41-0c80-13a1509e289c@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 13:36:28 +0530
From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>
CC: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Joao Pinto <Joao.Pinto@...opsys.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/18] PCI: designware-ep: Add generic function for
raising MSI irq
Hi Niklas,
On Thursday 28 December 2017 03:59 AM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 26, 2017 at 06:20:54PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>> Hi Niklas,
>
> Hello Kishon
>
>>
>> On Wednesday 20 December 2017 04:59 AM, Niklas Cassel wrote:
>>> Add a generic function for raising MSI irqs that can be used by all
>>> DWC based controllers.
>>>
>>> Note that certain controllers, like DRA7xx, have a special convenience
>>> register for raising MSI irqs that doesn't require you to explicitly map
>>> the MSI address. Therefore, it is likely that certain drivers will
>>> not use this generic function, even if they can.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 9 +++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c b/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
>>> index 700ed2f4becf..c5aa1cac5041 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
>>> @@ -282,6 +282,41 @@ static const struct pci_epc_ops epc_ops = {
>>> .stop = dw_pcie_ep_stop,
>>> };
>>>
>>> +int dw_pcie_ep_raise_msi_irq(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep,
>>> + u8 interrupt_num)
>>> +{
>>> + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep);
>>> + struct pci_epc *epc = ep->epc;
>>> + u16 msg_ctrl, msg_data;
>>> + u32 msg_addr_lower, msg_addr_upper;
>>> + u64 msg_addr;
>>> + bool has_upper;
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + /* Raise MSI per the PCI Local Bus Specification Revision 3.0, 6.8.1. */
>>> + msg_ctrl = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, MSI_MESSAGE_CONTROL);
>>> + has_upper = !!(msg_ctrl & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT);
>>> + msg_addr_lower = dw_pcie_readl_dbi(pci, MSI_MESSAGE_ADDR_L32);
>>> + if (has_upper) {
>>> + msg_addr_upper = dw_pcie_readl_dbi(pci, MSI_MESSAGE_ADDR_U32);
>>> + msg_data = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, MSI_MESSAGE_DATA_64);
>>> + } else {
>>> + msg_addr_upper = 0;
>>> + msg_data = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, MSI_MESSAGE_DATA_32);
>>> + }
>>> + msg_addr = ((u64) msg_addr_upper) << 32 | msg_addr_lower;
>>> + ret = dw_pcie_ep_map_addr(epc, ep->msi_mem_phys, msg_addr,
>>> + epc->mem->page_size);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>>> +
>>> + writel(msg_data | (interrupt_num - 1), ep->msi_mem);
>>
>> Shouldn't this be msg_data + (interrupt_num - 1)?
>
> I'm not quite sure about this, but if there is a pending irq,
> not yet processed by the RC, the msg_data we read out in this
> function should have a bit set, matching the pending irq.
IIUC, the msg_data that we read here should not depend on the pending irq on
the RC side. msg_data should have the starting MSI vector number assigned by RC
for that EP device. (msg.data = pos; in dw_msi_setup_msg() also seem to suggest
the same).
>
> If that irq is the same as the irq we are trying to raise,
> doing an addition will produce a bogus vector number,
> but a bitwise or should work.
if msg_data has the starting MSI vector, doing an addition should get to the
correct MSI vector.
>
> For that reason, I think that doing bitwise or seems safer.
> However, other than this case, I don't see why it should
> matter if we do an addition or a bitwise or.
>
> Are you having some problem with the code?
> It seems to be working fine on ARTPEC-6:
>
> # ./pcitest -m 1
> MSI1: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 2
> MSI2: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 3
> MSI3: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 4
> MSI4: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 5
> MSI5: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 6
> MSI6: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 7
> MSI7: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 8
> MSI8: OKAY
> # ./pcitest -m 9
> MSI9: OKAY
> # cat /proc/interrupts | grep -i msi
> 82: 9 0 GIC-0 180 Level artpec6-pcie-msi
> 188: 1 0 PCI-MSI 16 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 189: 1 0 PCI-MSI 17 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 190: 1 0 PCI-MSI 18 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 191: 1 0 PCI-MSI 19 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 192: 1 0 PCI-MSI 20 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 193: 1 0 PCI-MSI 21 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 194: 1 0 PCI-MSI 22 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 195: 1 0 PCI-MSI 23 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 196: 1 0 PCI-MSI 24 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 197: 0 0 PCI-MSI 25 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 198: 0 0 PCI-MSI 26 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 199: 0 0 PCI-MSI 27 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 200: 0 0 PCI-MSI 28 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 201: 0 0 PCI-MSI 29 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 202: 0 0 PCI-MSI 30 Edge pci-endpoint-test
> 203: 0 0 PCI-MSI 31 Edge pci-endpoint-test
>
> From EP:
> irq: 1 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x10
> irq: 2 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x11
> irq: 3 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x12
> irq: 4 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x13
> irq: 5 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x14
> irq: 6 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x15
> irq: 7 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x16
> irq: 8 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x17
> irq: 9 read msg_data: 0x10 writing: 0x18
since your msg_data is 0x10, you are not facing the issue. What if it's 0x1? In
my case If I have Gustavo's patch series applied, msg_data has a value of 0x1
and I don't get certain MSI interrupts.
Thanks
Kishon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists