linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] MIPS: ralink: implement 'pcibios_root_bridge

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: <CAMhs-H8vw48RkpFz+rqvoPqDPpkaHdn60j6SdbDJHTNTTp7Fcg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 Dec 2021 16:50:18 +0100
From:   Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] MIPS: ralink: implement 'pcibios_root_bridge_prepare()'

Hi Guenter,

On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 4:06 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> On 12/2/21 12:29 AM, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > Hi Guenter,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 11:17 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/1/21 1:51 PM, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> >>> PCI core code call 'pcibios_root_bridge_prepare()' function inside function
> >>> 'pci_register_host_bridge()'. This point is very good way to properly enter
> >>> into this MIPS ralink specific code to properly setup I/O coherency units
> >>> with PCI memory addresses.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>    arch/mips/ralink/mt7621.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>    1 file changed, 30 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/mips/ralink/mt7621.c b/arch/mips/ralink/mt7621.c
> >>> index bd71f5b14238..7649416c1cd7 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/mips/ralink/mt7621.c
> >>> +++ b/arch/mips/ralink/mt7621.c
> >>> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> >>>    #include <linux/slab.h>
> >>>    #include <linux/sys_soc.h>
> >>>    #include <linux/memblock.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/pci.h>
> >>>
> >>>    #include <asm/bootinfo.h>
> >>>    #include <asm/mipsregs.h>
> >>> @@ -22,6 +23,35 @@
> >>>
> >>>    static void *detect_magic __initdata = detect_memory_region;
> >>>
> >>> +int pcibios_root_bridge_prepare(struct pci_host_bridge *bridge)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     struct resource_entry *entry;
> >>> +     resource_size_t mask;
> >>> +
> >>> +     entry = resource_list_first_type(&bridge->windows, IORESOURCE_MEM);
> >>> +     if (!entry) {
> >>> +             pr_err("Cannot get memory resource\n");
> >>> +             return -EINVAL;
> >>> +     }
> >>> +
> >>> +     if (mips_cps_numiocu(0)) {
> >>> +             /*
> >>> +              * FIXME: hardware doesn't accept mask values with 1s after
> >>> +              * 0s (e.g. 0xffef), so it would be great to warn if that's
> >>> +              * about to happen
> >>> +              */ > +         mask = ~(entry->res->end - entry->res->start);
> >>> +
> >>
> >> Try something like this:
> >>                  WARN_ON((mask != ~0UL && BIT(ffz(mask)) - 1 != mask);
> >
> > Thanks for the tip. The following works for me:
> >
> >                    WARN_ON(mask != ~0UL && ~(BIT(__ffs(mask)) - 1) != mask);
>
> Are you sure ? __ffs() returns the first bit set, which isn't useful
> for this test.

My mask is calculated as follows:
 mask = ~(entry->res->end - entry->res->start);

Where for normal memory resource:
 - entry->res->end = 0x6fffffff;
 - entry->res->start = 0x60000000;

So I end up with a mask: 0xf0000000.

So applying ~(BIT(__ffs(mask)) - 1) I get a good '0xf0000000' for this
particular case which looks correct.

Suppose an invalid case with the mask being 0xffef0000.

Applying ~(BIT(__ffs(mask)) - 1) will be 0xffff0000 which will trigger
the WARN_ON since 0xffff0000 != 0xffef0000

So I think this is correct... Am I missing something?

Thanks,
    Sergio Paracuellos
>
> Guenter
>
> >
> > I will send this as a different patch, though.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >      Sergio Paracuellos
> >
> >>
> >>> +             write_gcr_reg1_base(entry->res->start);
> >>> +             write_gcr_reg1_mask(mask | CM_GCR_REGn_MASK_CMTGT_IOCU0);
> >>> +             pr_info("PCI coherence region base: 0x%08llx, mask/settings: 0x%08llx\n",
> >>> +                     (unsigned long long)read_gcr_reg1_base(),
> >>> +                     (unsigned long long)read_gcr_reg1_mask());
> >>> +     }
> >>> +
> >>> +     return 0;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>>    phys_addr_t mips_cpc_default_phys_base(void)
> >>>    {
> >>>        panic("Cannot detect cpc address");
> >>>
> >>
>