linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v14 6/6] soc: mediatek: mutex: add functions that operate registers by CMDQ

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: <20220317233104.5994-1-miles.chen@mediatek.com>
Date:   Fri, 18 Mar 2022 07:31:04 +0800
From:   Miles Chen <miles.chen@...iatek.com>
To:     <moudy.ho@...iatek.com>
CC:     <Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com>,
        <acourbot@...omium.org>, <allen-kh.cheng@...iatek.com>,
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>, <daoyuan.huang@...iatek.com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <drinkcat@...omium.org>,
        <geert+renesas@...der.be>, <hsinyi@...gle.com>,
        <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>, <jason-jh.lin@...iatek.com>,
        <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>, <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <maoguang.meng@...iatek.com>,
        <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        <menghui.lin@...iatek.com>, <pihsun@...omium.org>,
        <ping-hsun.wu@...iatek.com>, <randy.wu@...iatek.com>,
        <river.cheng@...iatek.com>, <rob@...dley.net>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <roy-cw.yeh@...iatek.com>,
        <sj.huang@...iatek.com>, <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>,
        <tfiga@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 6/6] soc: mediatek: mutex: add functions that operate registers by CMDQ

Hi Moudy,

>  #define MT2701_MUTEX0_MOD0			0x2c
>  #define MT2701_MUTEX0_SOF0			0x30
> @@ -180,6 +184,9 @@ struct mtk_mutex_ctx {
>  	void __iomem			*regs;
>  	struct mtk_mutex		mutex[10];
>  	const struct mtk_mutex_data	*data;
> +	phys_addr_t			addr;
> +	struct cmdq_client_reg		cmdq_reg;
> +	bool				has_gce_client_reg;
>  };
>

...snip...

>  static const unsigned int mt2701_mutex_mod[DDP_COMPONENT_ID_MAX] = {
> @@ -638,6 +645,29 @@ void mtk_mutex_enable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_enable);
>  
> +void mtk_mutex_enable_by_cmdq(struct mtk_mutex *mutex, void *pkt)
> +{
> +#if IS_REACHABLE(CONFIG_MTK_CMDQ)
> +	struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
> +						 mutex[mutex->id]);
> +	struct cmdq_pkt *cmdq_pkt = (struct cmdq_pkt *)pkt;
> +
> +	WARN_ON(&mtx->mutex[mutex->id] != mutex);
> +
> +	if (!mtx->has_gce_client_reg) {
> +		dev_dbg(mtx->dev, "mediatek,gce-client-reg hasn't been set in dts");
> +		return;
> +	}
> +
> +	cmdq_pkt_write_mask(cmdq_pkt, mtx->cmdq_reg.subsys,
> +			    mtx->addr + DISP_REG_MUTEX_EN(mutex->id),
> +			    MTK_MUTEX_ENABLE, MTK_MUTEX_ENABLE);

We do not check if mtx->addr is valid.

> +#else
> +	dev_dbg(mtx->dev, "Not support for enable MUTEX by CMDQ");
> +#endif
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mtk_mutex_enable_by_cmdq);
> +
>  void mtk_mutex_disable(struct mtk_mutex *mutex)
>  {
>  	struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx = container_of(mutex, struct mtk_mutex_ctx,
> @@ -676,7 +706,7 @@ static int mtk_mutex_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>  	struct mtk_mutex_ctx *mtx;
> -	struct resource *regs;
> +	struct resource *regs, addr;
>  	int i;
>  
>  	mtx = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*mtx), GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -697,6 +727,19 @@ static int mtk_mutex_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> +	if (of_address_to_resource(dev->of_node, 0, &addr) < 0)
> +		mtx->addr = 0L;

addr is phys_addr_t, which means that it holds a physical address.
0 may be a valid address in some platforms, so I think
we should not set mtx->addr = 0L when of_address_to_resource fails.
Maybe probe fail by returning dev_err_probe()?

Thanks,
Miles