linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: expose numa

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: <20200602061112.GC2256033@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 2 Jun 2020 08:11:12 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
Cc:     "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org" <iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: expose numa_node to users in sysfs

On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 05:09:57AM +0000, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
> > >
> > > Platform devices are NUMA?  That's crazy, and feels like a total abuse
> > > of platform devices and drivers that really should belong on a "real"
> > > bus.
> > 
> > I am not sure if it is an abuse of platform device. But smmu is a platform
> > device,
> > drivers/iommu/arm-smmu-v3.c is a platform driver.
> > In a typical ARM server, there are maybe multiple SMMU devices which can
> > support
> > IO virtual address and page tables for other devices on PCI-like busses.
> > Each different SMMU device might be close to different NUMA node. There is
> > really a hardware topology.
> > 
> > If you have multiple CPU packages in a NUMA server, some platform devices
> > might
> > Belong to CPU0, some other might belong to CPU1.
> 
> Those devices are populated by acpi_iort for an ARM server:
> 
> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:
> 
> static const struct iort_dev_config iort_arm_smmu_v3_cfg __initconst = {
>         .name = "arm-smmu-v3",
>         .dev_dma_configure = arm_smmu_v3_dma_configure,
>         .dev_count_resources = arm_smmu_v3_count_resources,
>         .dev_init_resources = arm_smmu_v3_init_resources,
>         .dev_set_proximity = arm_smmu_v3_set_proximity,
> };
> 
> void __init acpi_iort_init(void)
> {
>         acpi_status status;
> 
>         status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_IORT, 0, &iort_table);
>         ...
>         iort_check_id_count_workaround(iort_table);
>         iort_init_platform_devices();
> }
> 
> static void __init iort_init_platform_devices(void)
> {
>         ...
> 
>         for (i = 0; i < iort->node_count; i++) {
>                 if (iort_node >= iort_end) {
>                         pr_err("iort node pointer overflows, bad table\n");
>                         return;
>                 }
> 
>                 iort_enable_acs(iort_node);
> 
>                 ops = iort_get_dev_cfg(iort_node);
>                 if (ops) {
>                         fwnode = acpi_alloc_fwnode_static();
>                         if (!fwnode)
>                                 return;
> 
>                         iort_set_fwnode(iort_node, fwnode);
> 
>                         ret = iort_add_platform_device(iort_node, ops);
>                         if (ret) {
>                                 iort_delete_fwnode(iort_node);
>                                 acpi_free_fwnode_static(fwnode);
>                                 return;
>                         }
>                 }
> 
>                 ...
>         }
> ...
> }
> 
> NUMA node is got from ACPI:
> 
> static int  __init arm_smmu_v3_set_proximity(struct device *dev,
>                                               struct acpi_iort_node *node)
> {
>         struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *smmu;
> 
>         smmu = (struct acpi_iort_smmu_v3 *)node->node_data;
>         if (smmu->flags & ACPI_IORT_SMMU_V3_PXM_VALID) {
>                 int dev_node = acpi_map_pxm_to_node(smmu->pxm);
> 
>                 ...
> 
>                 set_dev_node(dev, dev_node);
>                 ...
>         }
>         return 0;
> }
> 
> Barry

That's fine, but those are "real" devices, not platform devices, right?

What platform device has this issue?  What one will show up this way
with the new patch?

thanks,

greg k-h