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]

Date:   Wed, 3 Oct 2018 15:27:32 +0800
From:   Kai Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
To:     Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        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 Oct 3, 2018, at 3:24 PM, Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com> wrote:
> 
> 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?

Looks like the patch is not correctly threaded. I’ll resend the series.

> 
> 
>> .../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.

Thanks, I’ll update this one.

> 
> 
>> #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…

I’ll resend one soon.

Thanks!

Kai-Heng

> 
> --
> Cheers,
> Luca.