linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: Revert "mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: add erratum A-009204 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: <CAPDyKFqyU1nyVUsuAPC8ZDCm88JOq45aywDM7AqR9vfr0k90jw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 10:51:30 +0100
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
Cc:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Yinbo Zhu <yinbo.zhu@....com>,
        "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: Revert "mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: add
 erratum A-009204 support"

On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 09:54, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk> wrote:
>
> This reverts commit 5dd195522562542bc6ebe6e7bd47890d8b7ca93c.
>
> First, the fix seems to be plain wrong, since the erratum suggests
> waiting 5ms before setting setting SYSCTL[RSTD], but this msleep()
> happens after the call of sdhci_reset() which is where that bit gets
> set (if SDHCI_RESET_DATA is in mask).
>
> Second, walking the whole device tree to figure out if some node has a
> "fsl,p2020-esdhc" compatible string is hugely expensive - about 70 to
> 100 us on our mpc8309 board. Walking the device tree is done under a
> raw_spin_lock, so this is obviously really bad on an -rt system, and a
> waste of time on all.
>
> In fact, since esdhc_reset() seems to get called around 100 times per
> second, that mpc8309 now spends 0.8% of its time determining that
> it is not a p2020. Whether those 100 calls/s are normal or due to some
> other bug or misconfiguration, regularly hitting a 100 us
> non-preemptible window is unacceptable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>

Applied for fixes and by adding a stable tag, thanks!

Kind regards
Uffe


> ---
>
> The errata sheet for mpc8309 also mentions A-009204, so I'm not at all
> opposed to having a fix for that. But it needs to be done properly
> without causing a huge performance or latency impact. We should
> probably just add a bit to struct sdhci_esdhc which gets initialized
> in esdhc_init.
>
>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c | 3 ---
>  1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> index 5cca3fa4610b..7f87a90bf56a 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> @@ -764,9 +764,6 @@ static void esdhc_reset(struct sdhci_host *host, u8 mask)
>         sdhci_writel(host, host->ier, SDHCI_INT_ENABLE);
>         sdhci_writel(host, host->ier, SDHCI_SIGNAL_ENABLE);
>
> -       if (of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "fsl,p2020-esdhc"))
> -               mdelay(5);
> -
>         if (mask & SDHCI_RESET_ALL) {
>                 val = sdhci_readl(host, ESDHC_TBCTL);
>                 val &= ~ESDHC_TB_EN;
> --
> 2.23.0
>