| 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: <20180912203059.GA18201@roeck-us.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 13:30:59 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Vernon Mauery <vernon.mauery@...ux.intel.com>,
OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
James Feist <james.feist@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH i2c-next v6] i2c: aspeed: Handle master/slave combined
irq events properly
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 01:10:45PM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
> On 9/12/2018 12:58 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 09:54:51AM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
> >>On 9/11/2018 6:34 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 04:58:44PM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
> >>>>On 9/11/2018 4:33 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>>>>Looking into the patch, clearing the interrupt status at the end of an
> >>>>>interrupt handler is always suspicious and tends to result in race
> >>>>>conditions (because additional interrupts may have arrived while handling
> >>>>>the existing interrupts, or because interrupt handling itself may trigger
> >>>>>another interrupt). With that in mind, the following patch fixes the
> >>>>>problem for me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Guenter
> >>>>>
> >>>>>---
> >>>>>
> >>>>>diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> >>>>>index c258c4d9a4c0..c488e6950b7c 100644
> >>>>>--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> >>>>>+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> >>>>>@@ -552,6 +552,8 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
> >>>>> spin_lock(&bus->lock);
> >>>>> irq_received = readl(bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
> >>>>>+ /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
> >>>>>+ writel(irq_received, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
> >>>>> irq_remaining = irq_received;
> >>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
> >>>>>@@ -584,8 +586,6 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
> >>>>> "irq handled != irq. expected 0x%08x, but was 0x%08x\n",
> >>>>> irq_received, irq_handled);
> >>>>>- /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
> >>>>>- writel(irq_received, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
> >>>>> spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
> >>>>> return irq_remaining ? IRQ_NONE : IRQ_HANDLED;
> >>>>> }
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>My intention of putting the code at the end of interrupt handler was,
> >>>>to reduce possibility of combined irq calls which is explained in this
> >>>>patch. But YES, I agree with you. It could make a potential race
> >>>
> >>>Hmm, yes, but that doesn't explain why it would make sense to acknowledge
> >>>the interrupt late. The interrupt ack only means "I am going to handle these
> >>>interrupts". If additional interrupts arrive while the interrupt handler
> >>>is active, those will have to be acknowledged separately.
> >>>
> >>>Sure, there is a risk that an interrupt arrives while the handler is
> >>>running, and that it is handled but not acknowledged. That can happen
> >>>with pretty much all interrupt handlers, and there are mitigations to
> >>>limit the impact (for example, read the interrupt status register in
> >>>a loop until no more interrupts are pending). But acknowledging
> >>>an interrupt that was possibly not handled is always bad idea.
> >>
> >>Well, that's generally right but not always. Sometimes that depends on
> >>hardware and Aspeed I2C is the case.
> >>
> >>This is a description from Aspeed AST2500 datasheet:
> >> I2CD10 Interrupt Status Register
> >> bit 2 Receive Done Interrupt status
> >> S/W needs to clear this status bit to allow next data receiving.
> >>
> >>It means, driver should hold this bit to prevent transition of hardware
> >>state machine until the driver handles received data, so the bit should
> >>be cleared at the end of interrupt handler.
> >>
> >That makes sense. Does that apply to the other status bits as well ?
> >Reason for asking is that the current code actually gets stuck
> >in transmit, not receive.
> >
> Only bit 2 has that description in datasheet. Is slave config enabled
> for QEMU build? Does that get stuck in master sending or slave
> receiving?
>
qemu does not support slave mode. Linux gets stuck in master tx.
I played with the code on both sides. I had to make changes in both
the linux kernel and in qemu to get the code to work again.
See attached.
Guenter
---
Linux:
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
index c258c4d9a4c0..3d518e09369f 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
@@ -552,6 +552,9 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
spin_lock(&bus->lock);
irq_received = readl(bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
+ /* Ack all interrupts except for Rx done */
+ writel(irq_received & ~ASPEED_I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE,
+ bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
irq_remaining = irq_received;
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
@@ -584,8 +587,10 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
"irq handled != irq. expected 0x%08x, but was 0x%08x\n",
irq_received, irq_handled);
- /* Ack all interrupt bits. */
- writel(irq_received, bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
+ /* Ack Rx done */
+ if (irq_received & ASPEED_I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE)
+ writel(ASPEED_I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE,
+ bus->base + ASPEED_I2C_INTR_STS_REG);
spin_unlock(&bus->lock);
return irq_remaining ? IRQ_NONE : IRQ_HANDLED;
}
---
qemu:
diff --git a/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c b/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c
index c762c73..0d4aa08 100644
--- a/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c
+++ b/hw/i2c/aspeed_i2c.c
@@ -180,6 +180,33 @@ static uint8_t aspeed_i2c_get_state(AspeedI2CBus *bus)
return (bus->cmd >> I2CD_TX_STATE_SHIFT) & I2CD_TX_STATE_MASK;
}
+static void aspeed_i2c_handle_rx_cmd(AspeedI2CBus *bus)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ if (!(bus->cmd & (I2CD_M_RX_CMD | I2CD_M_S_RX_CMD_LAST))) {
+ return;
+ }
+ if (bus->intr_status & I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE) {
+ return;
+ }
+
+ aspeed_i2c_set_state(bus, I2CD_MRXD);
+ ret = i2c_recv(bus->bus);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, "%s: read failed\n", __func__);
+ ret = 0xff;
+ } else {
+ bus->intr_status |= I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE;
+ }
+ bus->buf = (ret & I2CD_BYTE_BUF_RX_MASK) << I2CD_BYTE_BUF_RX_SHIFT;
+ if (bus->cmd & I2CD_M_S_RX_CMD_LAST) {
+ i2c_nack(bus->bus);
+ }
+ bus->cmd &= ~(I2CD_M_RX_CMD | I2CD_M_S_RX_CMD_LAST);
+ aspeed_i2c_set_state(bus, I2CD_MACTIVE);
+}
+
/*
* The state machine needs some refinement. It is only used to track
* invalid STOP commands for the moment.
@@ -188,7 +215,7 @@ static void aspeed_i2c_bus_handle_cmd(AspeedI2CBus *bus, uint64_t value)
{
bus->cmd &= ~0xFFFF;
bus->cmd |= value & 0xFFFF;
- bus->intr_status = 0;
+ bus->intr_status &= I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE;
if (bus->cmd & I2CD_M_START_CMD) {
uint8_t state = aspeed_i2c_get_state(bus) & I2CD_MACTIVE ?
@@ -227,22 +254,7 @@ static void aspeed_i2c_bus_handle_cmd(AspeedI2CBus *bus, uint64_t value)
}
if (bus->cmd & (I2CD_M_RX_CMD | I2CD_M_S_RX_CMD_LAST)) {
- int ret;
-
- aspeed_i2c_set_state(bus, I2CD_MRXD);
- ret = i2c_recv(bus->bus);
- if (ret < 0) {
- qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, "%s: read failed\n", __func__);
- ret = 0xff;
- } else {
- bus->intr_status |= I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE;
- }
- bus->buf = (ret & I2CD_BYTE_BUF_RX_MASK) << I2CD_BYTE_BUF_RX_SHIFT;
- if (bus->cmd & I2CD_M_S_RX_CMD_LAST) {
- i2c_nack(bus->bus);
- }
- bus->cmd &= ~(I2CD_M_RX_CMD | I2CD_M_S_RX_CMD_LAST);
- aspeed_i2c_set_state(bus, I2CD_MACTIVE);
+ aspeed_i2c_handle_rx_cmd(bus);
}
if (bus->cmd & I2CD_M_STOP_CMD) {
@@ -263,6 +275,7 @@ static void aspeed_i2c_bus_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset,
uint64_t value, unsigned size)
{
AspeedI2CBus *bus = opaque;
+ int status;
switch (offset) {
case I2CD_FUN_CTRL_REG:
@@ -283,9 +296,16 @@ static void aspeed_i2c_bus_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset,
bus->intr_ctrl = value & 0x7FFF;
break;
case I2CD_INTR_STS_REG:
+ status = bus->intr_status;
bus->intr_status &= ~(value & 0x7FFF);
- bus->controller->intr_status &= ~(1 << bus->id);
- qemu_irq_lower(bus->controller->irq);
+ if (!bus->intr_status) {
+ bus->controller->intr_status &= ~(1 << bus->id);
+ qemu_irq_lower(bus->controller->irq);
+ }
+ if ((status & I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE) && !(bus->intr_status & I2CD_INTR_RX_DONE)) {
+ aspeed_i2c_handle_rx_cmd(bus);
+ aspeed_i2c_bus_raise_interrupt(bus);
+ }
break;
case I2CD_DEV_ADDR_REG:
qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, "%s: slave mode not implemented\n",
Powered by blists - more mailing lists