| 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: <VI1PR0601MB21112A89C4A8BE817EEDE04E8FC20@VI1PR0601MB2111.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2019 21:27:25 +0000
From: Morten Borup Petersen <morten_bp@...e.dk>
To: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
Tushar Khandelwal <tushar.khandelwal@....com>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"tushar.2nov@...il.com" <tushar.2nov@...il.com>,
"nd@....com" <nd@....com>,
Morten Borup Petersen <morten.petersen@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Devicetree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mailbox: arm_mhuv2: add device tree binding
documentation
On 7/21/19 11:58 PM, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 2:26 PM Tushar Khandelwal
> <tushar.khandelwal@....com> wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm,mhuv2.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm,mhuv2.txt
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..3a05593414bc
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mailbox/arm,mhuv2.txt
>> @@ -0,0 +1,108 @@
>> +Arm MHUv2 Mailbox Driver
>> +========================
>> +
>> +The Arm Message-Handling-Unit (MHU) Version 2 is a mailbox controller that has
>> +between 1 and 124 channel windows to provide unidirectional communication with
>> +remote processor(s).
>> +
>> +Given the unidirectional nature of the device, an MHUv2 mailbox may only be
>> +written to or read from. If a pair of MHU devices is implemented between two
>> +processing elements to provide bidirectional communication, these must be
>> +specified as two separate mailboxes.
>> +
>> +A device tree node for an Arm MHUv2 device must specify either a receiver frame
>> +or a sender frame, indicating which end of the unidirectional MHU device which
>> +the device node entry describes.
>> +
>> +An MHU device must be specified with a transport protocol. The transport
>> +protocol of an MHU device determines the method of data transmission as well as
>> +the number of provided mailboxes.
>> +Following are the possible transport protocol types:
>> +- Single-word: An MHU device implements as many mailboxes as it
>> + provides channel windows. Data is transmitted through
>> + the MHU registers.
>> +- Multi-word: An MHU device implements a single mailbox. All channel windows
>> + will be used during transmission. Data is transmitted through
>> + the MHU registers.
>> +- Doorbell: An MHU device implements as many mailboxes as there are flag
>> + bits available in its channel windows. Optionally, data may
>> + be transmitted through a shared memory region, wherein the MHU
>> + is used strictly as an interrupt generation mechanism.
>> +
>> +Mailbox Device Node:
>> +====================
>> +
>> +Required properties:
>> +--------------------
>> +- compatible: Shall be "arm,mhuv2" & "arm,primecell"
>> +- reg: Contains the mailbox register address range (base
>> + address and length)
>> +- #mbox-cells Shall be 1 - the index of the channel needed.
>> +- mhu-frame Frame type of the device.
>> + Shall be either "sender" or "receiver"
>> +- mhu-protocol Transport protocol of the device. Shall be one of the
>> + following: "single-word", "multi-word", "doorbell"
>> +
>> +Required properties (receiver frame):
>> +-------------------------------------
>> +- interrupts: Contains the interrupt information corresponding to the
>> + combined interrupt of the receiver frame
>> +
>> +Example:
>> +--------
>> +
>> + mbox_mw_tx: mhu@...00000 {
>> + compatible = "arm,mhuv2","arm,primecell";
>> + reg = <0x10000000 0x1000>;
>> + clocks = <&refclk100mhz>;
>> + clock-names = "apb_pclk";
>> + #mbox-cells = <1>;
>> + mhu-protocol = "multi-word";
>> + mhu-frame = "sender";
>> + };
>> +
>> + mbox_sw_tx: mhu@...00000 {
>> + compatible = "arm,mhuv2","arm,primecell";
>> + reg = <0x11000000 0x1000>;
>> + clocks = <&refclk100mhz>;
>> + clock-names = "apb_pclk";
>> + #mbox-cells = <1>;
>> + mhu-protocol = "single-word";
>> + mhu-frame = "sender";
>> + };
>> +
>> + mbox_db_rx: mhu@...00000 {
>> + compatible = "arm,mhuv2","arm,primecell";
>> + reg = <0x12000000 0x1000>;
>> + clocks = <&refclk100mhz>;
>> + clock-names = "apb_pclk";
>> + #mbox-cells = <1>;
>> + interrupts = <0 45 4>;
>> + interrupt-names = "mhu_rx";
>> + mhu-protocol = "doorbell";
>> + mhu-frame = "receiver";
>> + };
>> +
>> + mhu_client: scb@...00000 {
>> + compatible = "fujitsu,mb86s70-scb-1.0";
>> + reg = <0 0x2e000000 0x4000>;
>> + mboxes =
>> + // For multi-word frames, client may only instantiate a single
>> + // mailbox for a mailbox controller
>> + <&mbox_mw_tx 0>,
>> +
>> + // For single-word frames, client may instantiate as many
>> + // mailboxes as there are channel windows in the MHU
>> + <&mbox_sw_tx 0>,
>> + <&mbox_sw_tx 1>,
>> + <&mbox_sw_tx 2>,
>> + <&mbox_sw_tx 3>,
>> +
>> + // For doorbell frames, client may instantiate as many mailboxes
>> + // as there are bits available in the combined number of channel
>> + // windows ((channel windows * 32) mailboxes)
>> + <mbox_db_rx 0>,
>> + <mbox_db_rx 1>,
>> + ...
>> + <mbox_db_rx 17>;
>> + };
>
> If the mhuv2 instance implements, say, 3 channel windows between
> sender (linux) and receiver (firmware), and Linux runs two protocols
> each requiring 1 and 2-word sized messages respectively. The hardware
> supports that by assigning windows [0] and [1,2] to each protocol.
> However, I don't think the driver can support that. Or does it?
>
Correct, this version of the driver does not support mixing-and-matching
protocols for an MHU device.
Given the current use-cases for the driver, we do not currently see a
need for this functionality. However, as you mention, the hardware does
not restrict this and it would be possible to add in a future version.
> Also I see problem with implementing "protocol modes" in the
> controller driver - 'mhu-protocol' property should go away. And
> 'mhu-frame' is unncessary - presence of interrupt property could imply
> 'receiver', otherwise 'sender'.
>
> Cheers!
>
I agree that the 'mhu-frame' property can be removed and the frame type
can be deduced from whether an interrupt property is present.
In regards to 'mhu-protocol', i still see value in having it as a device
tree property. As mentioned above, mixing protocols within an MHU is not
currently supported. We decided to specify the protocol for an MHU in
the device tree, given that the protocol influences how many mboxes it
is allowed for a mailbox client to register with a controller,
Thanks,
Morten
Powered by blists - more mailing lists