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:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:12:00 +0100
From:   Michał Stanek <mst@...ihalf.com>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stanekm@...gle.com,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>,
        levinale@...omium.org, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        bgolaszewski@...libre.com, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: cherryview: Add quirk with custom translation of
 ACPI GPIO numbers

On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 11:14 AM Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 07:43:24PM +0100, Michał Stanek wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Mika,
> > > >
> > > > The previous patches from Dmitry handled IRQ numbering, here we have a
> > > > similar issue with GPIO to pin translation - hardcoded values in FW
> > > > which do not agree with the (non-consecutive) numbering in newer
> > > > kernels.
> > >
> > > Hmm, so instead of passing GpioIo/GpioInt resources to devices the
> > > firmware uses some hard-coded Linux GPIO numbering scheme? Would you
> > > able to share the exact firmware description where this happens?
> >
> > Actually it is a GPIO offset in ACPI tables for Braswell that was
> > hardcoded in the old firmware to match the previous (consecutive)
> > Linux GPIO numbering.
>
> Can you share the ACPI tables and point me to the GPIO that is using
> Linux number?

I think this is the one:
https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/third_party/coreboot/%2B/286534/2/src/mainboard/google/cyan/acpi/chromeos.asl

On Kefka the sysfs GPIO number for wpsw_cur was gpio392 before the
translation change occurred in Linux.

> > > > > What GPIO(s) we are talking about and how does it show up to the user?
> > > >
> > > > As an example, the issue manifests itself when you run 'crossystem
> > > > wpsw_cur'. On my Kefka it incorrectly reports the value as 1 instead
> > > > of 0 when the write protect screw is removed.
> > >
> > > Is it poking GPIOs directly through sysfs relying the Linux GPIO
> > > numbering (which can change and is fragile anyway)?
> >
> > I believe so, yes.
>
> This is something that should be fixed in userspace. Using global Linux
> GPIO or IRQ numbers is fragile and source of issues like this. There are
> correct ways of using GPIOs from userspace: in case of sysfs, you can
> find the base of the chip and then user relative numbering against it or
> switch to use libgpiod that does the same but uses the newer char
> device. Both cases the GPIO number are relative against the GPIO chip so
> they work even if global Linux GPIO numbering changes.

I analyzed crossystem source code and it looks like it is doing
exactly what you're saying without any hardcoded assumptions. It gets
the absolute offset of the GPIO pin from sysfs using its ACPI
identifier, then it subtracts the base offset of the GPIO bank from it
and the result is added to the bank's gpiochip%d number as it shows up
in sysfs. The result is what is used to export and read the state of
the pin.

With the newer kernel the gpiochip%d number is different so crossystem
ends up reading the wrong pin.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ