linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] iwlwifi: Load firmware exclusively for Intel WiFi

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: <2787bccf20b6f647de9f4cafae5fd223e771b167.camel@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 03 Oct 2018 10:24:44 +0300
From:   Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
To:     Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,
        Intel Linux Wireless <linuxwifi@...el.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] iwlwifi: Load firmware exclusively for Intel WiFi

On Wed, 2018-10-03 at 15:15 +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> To avoid the firmware loading race between Bluetooth and WiFi on Intel
> 8260, load firmware exclusively when BT_INTEL is enabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
> ---

Where is this coming from? Can you explain what "the firmware loading
race" is?


>  .../net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c   | 37 ++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
> index cc8c53dc0ab6..c30d3989e2a8 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/pcie/trans.c
> @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@
>  #include <linux/vmalloc.h>
>  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/intel-wifi-bt.h>

I don't see this upstream.  Is it something that was recently added?
Looks odd...

Regardless, this should also be protected on CONFIG_BT_INTEL.


>  #include "iwl-drv.h"
>  #include "iwl-trans.h"
> @@ -1335,6 +1336,10 @@ static int iwl_trans_pcie_start_fw(struct iwl_trans *trans,
>  	bool hw_rfkill;
>  	int ret;
>  
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
> +	void (*firmware_lock_func)(void);
> +	void (*firmware_unlock_func)(void);
> +#endif
>  	/* This may fail if AMT took ownership of the device */
>  	if (iwl_pcie_prepare_card_hw(trans)) {
>  		IWL_WARN(trans, "Exit HW not ready\n");
> @@ -1394,6 +1399,7 @@ static int iwl_trans_pcie_start_fw(struct iwl_trans *trans,
>  	 * RF-Kill switch is toggled, we will find out after having loaded
>  	 * the firmware and return the proper value to the caller.
>  	 */
> +

Stray empty line.

>  	iwl_enable_fw_load_int(trans);
>  
>  	/* really make sure rfkill handshake bits are cleared */
> @@ -1401,8 +1407,37 @@ static int iwl_trans_pcie_start_fw(struct iwl_trans *trans,
>  	iwl_write32(trans, CSR_UCODE_DRV_GP1_CLR, CSR_UCODE_SW_BIT_RFKILL);
>  
>  	/* Load the given image to the HW */
> -	if (trans->cfg->device_family >= IWL_DEVICE_FAMILY_8000)
> +	if (trans->cfg->device_family >= IWL_DEVICE_FAMILY_8000) {
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
> +		firmware_lock_func = symbol_request(btintel_firmware_lock);
> +		firmware_unlock_func = symbol_request(btintel_firmware_unlock);
> +		if (!firmware_lock_func || !firmware_unlock_func) {
> +			if (firmware_lock_func) {
> +				symbol_put(btintel_firmware_lock);
> +				firmware_lock_func = NULL;
> +			}
> +
> +			if (firmware_unlock_func) {
> +				symbol_put(btintel_firmware_unlock);
> +				firmware_unlock_func = NULL;
> +			}
> +		}
> +
> +		if (firmware_lock_func)
> +			firmware_lock_func();
> +#endif
>  		ret = iwl_pcie_load_given_ucode_8000(trans, fw);
> +
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BT_INTEL)
> +		if (firmware_unlock_func) {
> +			firmware_unlock_func();
> +			symbol_put(btintel_firmware_lock);
> +			firmware_lock_func = NULL;
> +			symbol_put(btintel_firmware_unlock);
> +			firmware_unlock_func = NULL;
> +		}
> +#endif
> +	}
>  	else
>  		ret = iwl_pcie_load_given_ucode(trans, fw);
>  

I'm not sure I like adding this BT-specific stuff here, especially not
without a detailed explanation.

Did you also send the other patches in this series to linux-wireless? I
can't see them...

--
Cheers,
Luca.