[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 14:53:42 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
"open list:ALPHA PORT" <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM PORT" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:IA64 (Itanium) PLATFORM" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:M68K ARCHITECTURE" <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
"open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:PARISC ARCHITECTURE" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
"open list:RISC-V ARCHITECTURE" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
"open list:SUPERH" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:SPARC + UltraSPARC (sparc/sparc64)"
<sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 01/39] Kconfig: introduce HAS_IOPORT option and select
it as necessary
On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 07:39:42PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 6:10 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 11:31:28PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > >
> > > The main goal is to avoid c), which is what happens on s390, but
> > > can also happen elsewhere. Catching b) would be nice as well,
> > > but is much harder to do from generic code as you'd need an
> > > architecture specific inline asm statement to insert a ex_table
> > > fixup, or a runtime conditional on each access.
> >
> > Or s390 could implement its own inb().
> >
> > I'm hearing that generic powerpc kernels have to run both on machines
> > that have I/O port space and those that don't. That makes me think
> > s390 could do something similar.
>
> No, this is actually the current situation, and it makes absolutely no
> sense. s390 has no way of implementing inb()/outb() because there
> are no instructions for it and it cannot tunnel them through a virtual
> address mapping like on most of the other architectures. (it has special
> instructions for accessing memory space, which is not the same as
> a pointer dereference here).
>
> The existing implementation gets flagged as a NULL pointer dereference
> by a compiler warning because it effectively is.
I think s390 currently uses the inb() in asm-generic/io.h, i.e.,
"__raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr)". I understand that's a NULL pointer
dereference because the default PCI_IOBASE is 0.
I mooted a s390 inb() implementation like "return ~0" because that's
what happens on most arches when there's no device to respond to the
inb().
The HAS_IOPORT dependencies are fairly ugly IMHO, and they clutter
drivers that use I/O ports in some cases but not others. But maybe
it's the most practical way.
Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists