| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20220527225148.GA511276@bhelgaas>
Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 17:51:48 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/11] PCI/PM: Write 0 to PMCSR in pci_power_up() in
all cases
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 08:52:17PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 9:46 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 11:54:22AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 08:10:43PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > > >
> > > > Make pci_power_up() write 0 to the device's PCI_PM_CTRL register in
> > > > order to put it into D0 regardless of the power state returned by
> > > > the previous read from that register which should not matter.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/pci/pci.c | 11 +++--------
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > > > ===================================================================
> > > > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > > > +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > > > @@ -1230,15 +1230,10 @@ int pci_power_up(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > > - * If we're (effectively) in D3, force entire word to 0. This doesn't
> > > > - * affect PME_Status, disables PME_En, and sets PowerState to 0.
> > > > + * Force the entire word to 0. This doesn't affect PME_Status, disables
> > > > + * PME_En, and sets PowerState to 0.
> > > > */
> > > > - if (state == PCI_D3hot)
> > > > - pmcsr = 0;
> > > > - else
> > > > - pmcsr &= ~PCI_PM_CTRL_STATE_MASK;
> > > > -
> > > > - pci_write_config_word(dev, dev->pm_cap + PCI_PM_CTRL, pmcsr);
> > > > + pci_write_config_word(dev, dev->pm_cap + PCI_PM_CTRL, 0);
> > >
> > > Can you reassure me why this is safe and useful?
> > >
> > > This is a 16-bit write that includes (PCIe r6.0, sec 7.5.2.2):
> > >
> > > 0x0003 PowerState RW
> > > 0x0004 RsvdP
> > > 0x0008 No_Soft_Reset RO
> > > 0x00f0 RsvdP
> > > 0x0100 PME_En RW/RWS
> > > 0x1e00 Data_Select RW, VF ROZ
> > > 0x6000 Data_Scale RO, VF ROZ
> > > 0x8000 PME_Status RW1CS
> > >
> > > We intend to set PowerState to 0 (D0), apparently intend to clear
> > > PME_En, and PME_Status is "write 1 to clear" to writing 0 does
> > > nothing, so those look OK.
> > >
> > > But the RsvdP fields are reserved for future RW bits and should be
> > > preserved, and it looks like clearing Data_Select could potentially
> > > break the Data Register power consumption reporting (which I don't
> > > think we support today).
> > >
> > > It seems like maybe we should do this instead:
> > >
> > > pci_write_config_word(dev, dev->pm_cap + PCI_PM_CTRL,
> > > pmcsr & ~PCI_PM_CTRL_STATE_MASK)
> > >
> > > to just unconditionally clear PowerState?
> >
> > Or I guess this, since we want to clear PME_En as well?
> >
> > pci_write_config_word(dev, dev->pm_cap + PCI_PM_CTRL, pmcsr &
> > ~(PCI_PM_CTRL_STATE_MASK | PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_ENABLE));
>
> Yes.
>
> Also, this patch actually only makes a difference if the device is
> going into D0 from D1 or D2, because we have always written 0 to the
> PMCSR during transitions from D3hot.
>
> It is inconsistent and confusing to do different things depending on
> the initial power state here and the code is simpler when 0 is written
> regardless.
I agree that depending on the initial power state is confusing (it
confused me :)).
What would you think of replacing this patch with the one below?
commit defde70748bc ("PCI/PM: Always put device in D0 and disable PME in pci_power_up()")
Author: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Date: Fri May 27 17:45:07 2022 -0500
PCI/PM: Always put device in D0 and disable PME in pci_power_up()
Unconditionally put the device in PCI_D0 and disable PME generation in
pci_power_up(), regardless of the power state returned by the previous read
from PCI_PM_CTRL, which should not matter.
Based-on-patch-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/5748066.MhkbZ0Pkbq@kreacher
Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
index a5b93f85377a..8e42a9dc1944 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
@@ -1229,14 +1229,9 @@ int pci_power_up(struct pci_dev *dev)
goto end;
}
- /*
- * If we're (effectively) in D3, force entire word to 0. This doesn't
- * affect PME_Status, disables PME_En, and sets PowerState to 0.
- */
- if (state == PCI_D3hot)
- pmcsr = 0;
- else
- pmcsr &= ~PCI_PM_CTRL_STATE_MASK;
+ /* Set PowerState to 0 (PCI_D0) and disable PME generation */
+ pmcsr &= ~PCI_PM_CTRL_STATE_MASK;
+ pmcsr &= ~PCI_PM_CTRL_PME_ENABLE;
pci_write_config_word(dev, dev->pm_cap + PCI_PM_CTRL, pmcsr);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists