linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 01/20] pinctrl: tegra: Add suspend and resume support

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: <36351140-afd4-38c4-3722-4ee0894287fa@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:59:55 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
        thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        jason@...edaemon.net, marc.zyngier@....com,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, stefan@...er.ch, mark.rutland@....com
Cc:     pdeschrijver@...dia.com, pgaikwad@...dia.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        jckuo@...dia.com, josephl@...dia.com, talho@...dia.com,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mperttunen@...dia.com, spatra@...dia.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...ysocki.net,
        viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 01/20] pinctrl: tegra: Add suspend and resume support

05.08.2019 21:06, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
> 
> On 8/5/19 3:50 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 01.08.2019 0:10, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
>>> This patch adds support for Tegra pinctrl driver suspend and resume.
>>>
>>> During suspend, context of all pinctrl registers are stored and
>>> on resume they are all restored to have all the pinmux and pad
>>> configuration for normal operation.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/pinctrl/tegra/pinctrl-tegra.c | 59
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   drivers/pinctrl/tegra/pinctrl-tegra.h |  3 ++
>>>   2 files changed, 62 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/tegra/pinctrl-tegra.c
>>> b/drivers/pinctrl/tegra/pinctrl-tegra.c
>>> index 186ef98e7b2b..e3a237534281 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/tegra/pinctrl-tegra.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/tegra/pinctrl-tegra.c
>>> @@ -631,6 +631,58 @@ static void
>>> tegra_pinctrl_clear_parked_bits(struct tegra_pmx *pmx)
>>>       }
>>>   }
>>>   +static size_t tegra_pinctrl_get_bank_size(struct device *dev,
>>> +                      unsigned int bank_id)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
>>> +    struct resource *res;
>>> +
>>> +    res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, bank_id);
>>> +
>>> +    return resource_size(res) / 4;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int tegra_pinctrl_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct tegra_pmx *pmx = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>> +    u32 *backup_regs = pmx->backup_regs;
>>> +    u32 *regs;
>>> +    size_t bank_size;
>>> +    unsigned int i, k;
>>> +
>>> +    for (i = 0; i < pmx->nbanks; i++) {
>>> +        bank_size = tegra_pinctrl_get_bank_size(dev, i);
>>> +        regs = pmx->regs[i];
>>> +        for (k = 0; k < bank_size; k++)
>>> +            *backup_regs++ = readl_relaxed(regs++);
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    return pinctrl_force_sleep(pmx->pctl);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int tegra_pinctrl_resume(struct device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct tegra_pmx *pmx = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>> +    u32 *backup_regs = pmx->backup_regs;
>>> +    u32 *regs;
>>> +    size_t bank_size;
>>> +    unsigned int i, k;
>>> +
>>> +    for (i = 0; i < pmx->nbanks; i++) {
>>> +        bank_size = tegra_pinctrl_get_bank_size(dev, i);
>>> +        regs = pmx->regs[i];
>>> +        for (k = 0; k < bank_size; k++)
>>> +            writel_relaxed(*backup_regs++, regs++);
>>> +    }
>> I'm now curious whether any kind of barrier is needed after the
>> writings. The pmx_writel() doesn't insert a barrier after the write and
>> seems it just misuses writel, which actually should be writel_relaxed()
>> + barrier, IIUC.
> 
> pmx_writel uses writel and it has wmb before raw_write which complete
> all writes initiated prior to this.
> 
> By misusing writel, you mean to have barrier after register write?

Yes, at least to me it doesn't make much sense for this driver to stall
before the write. It's the pinctrl user which should be taking care
about everything to be ready before making a change to the pinctrl's
configuration.

>> It's also not obvious whether PINCTRL HW has any kind of write-FIFO and
>> thus maybe read-back + rmb() is needed in order ensure that writes are
>> actually completed.
> I believe adding write barrier wmb after writel_relaxed should be good
> rather than doing readback + rmb
>>
>> The last thing which is not obvious is when the new configuration
>> actually takes into effect, does it happen immediately or maybe some
>> delay is needed?
>>
>> [snip]
> 
> Based on internal design there is no internal delay and it all depends
> on APB rate that it takes to write to register.
> 
> Pinmux value change to reflect internally might take couple of clock
> cycles which is much faster than SW can read.

Still not quite obvious if it's possible to have a case where some
hardware is touched before necessary pinctrl change is fully completed
and then to get into trouble because of it.