| 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: <YwfoAKorwSVooUY2@google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2022 21:22:08 +0000
From: William McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] PCI: dwc: Add support for 64-bit MSI target
address
On 08/25/2022, Robin Murphy wrote:
> On 2022-08-25 19:50, Will McVicker wrote:
> > Since not all devices require a 32-bit MSI address, add support to the
> > PCIe host driver to allow setting the DMA mask to 64-bits if the 32-bit
> > allocation fails. This allows kernels to disable ZONE_DMA32 and bounce
> > buffering (swiotlb) without risking not being able to get a 32-bit address
> > during DMA allocation.
> >
> > Basically, in the slim chance that there are no 32-bit allocations
> > available, the current PCIe host driver will fail to allocate the msi_msg
> > page due to a DMA address overflow (seen in [1]). With this patch, the
> > PCIe host can retry the allocation with a 64-bit DMA mask if the current
> > PCIe device advertises 64-bit support via its MSI capabilities.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Yo0soniFborDl7+C@google.com/
> >
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> > Acked-by: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>
> > ---
> > .../pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c | 38 ++++++++++++++-----
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c | 8 ++++
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > index 39f3b37d4033..8928a9a29d58 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > @@ -330,6 +330,9 @@ static int dw_pcie_msi_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
> > u64 *msi_vaddr;
> > int ret;
> > u32 ctrl, num_ctrls;
> > + bool msi_64bit = false;
> > + bool retry_64bit = false;
> > + u16 msi_capabilities;
> > for (ctrl = 0; ctrl < MAX_MSI_CTRLS; ctrl++)
> > pp->irq_mask[ctrl] = ~0;
> > @@ -367,16 +370,33 @@ static int dw_pcie_msi_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
> > dw_chained_msi_isr, pp);
> > }
> > - ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > - if (ret)
> > - dev_warn(dev, "Failed to set DMA mask to 32-bit. Devices with only 32-bit MSI support may not work properly\n");
> > + msi_capabilities = dw_pcie_msi_capabilities(pci);
> > + if (msi_capabilities & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE)
> > + msi_64bit = msi_capabilities & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT;
> > - msi_vaddr = dmam_alloc_coherent(dev, sizeof(u64), &pp->msi_data,
> > - GFP_KERNEL);
> > - if (!msi_vaddr) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "Failed to alloc and map MSI data\n");
> > - dw_pcie_free_msi(pp);
> > - return -ENOMEM;
> > + while (true) {
> > + dev_dbg(dev, "Setting MSI DMA mask to %s-bit.\n",
> > + retry_64bit ? "64" : "32");
>
> If only we has some sort of "variable" that could could store a numerical
> value, think of the possibilities... :)
Sure, now that we're trying both 32- and 64-bit, I can do that. Thanks for the
suggestion :)
>
> > + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, retry_64bit ?
> > + DMA_BIT_MASK(64) :
> > + DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > + if (ret)
> > + dev_warn(dev, "Failed to set DMA mask to %s-bit.\n",
> > + retry_64bit ? "64" : "32");
>
> Setting a 64-bit mask should never fail, since it represents having no
> possible limitation whatsoever (I'm not sure if there are any platforms left
> where setting a 32-bit mask can actually fail in practice either, but I have
> no strong opinion on the fate of the existing warning).
Yeah, I'm not sure how this could fail. So I just left the warning and edited
the message. It's probably cleaner to just leave the warning unconditionally
based on ret.
>
> > +
> > + msi_vaddr = dmam_alloc_coherent(dev, sizeof(u64), &pp->msi_data,
> > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!msi_vaddr) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to alloc and map MSI data\n");
>
> Possibly a mattrer of personal taste, but I'd say try to avoid dev_err() for
> things that aren't actually fatal; if you're still able to continue on, at
> best it's a warning, not an error. Especially if your use-case *expects* the
> 32-bit allocation fail. There's nothing more offputting than booting a
> typical vendor kernel and watching it scream tons of errors that look
> EXTREMELY IMPORTANT yet are also apparently inconsequential.
Failing a 32-bit allocation should be a rare case, but still possible. If it
fails for both 32-bit and 64-bit, then it's very likely the PCIe device calling
dw_pcie_host_init() will fail to probe. So I'll move this down to only report
that error.
>
> > + if (msi_64bit && !retry_64bit) {
> > + retry_64bit = true;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + dw_pcie_free_msi(pp);
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > + break;
>
> TBH the whole loop design is a bit baroque for me, I'd have gone for a more
> straightforward tweak to the existing flow, something like:
>
> msi_vaddr = NULL;
> ret = dma_set_mask(32);
> if (!ret)
> msi_vaddr = dma_alloc();
> if (!msi_vaddr && msi_64bit) {
> dev_warn();
> dma_set_mask(64);
> msi_vaddr = dma_alloc();
> }
> if (!msi_vaddr) {
> dev_err();
> return;
> }
>
> However I'm happy that you've captured the important functional point, so
> I'll leave the style matters up to Lorenzo.
I was trying to avoid duplicating the allocation code, but if that's preferred,
then I'm fine with it.
>
> Thanks,
> Robin.
>
> > }
> > return 0;
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> > index c6725c519a47..650a7f22f9d0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> > @@ -82,6 +82,14 @@ u8 dw_pcie_find_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dw_pcie_find_capability);
> > +u16 dw_pcie_msi_capabilities(struct dw_pcie *pci)
> > +{
> > + u8 offset;
> > +
> > + offset = dw_pcie_find_capability(pci, PCI_CAP_ID_MSI);
> > + return dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, offset + PCI_MSI_FLAGS);
> > +}
> > +
> > static u16 dw_pcie_find_next_ext_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u16 start,
> > u8 cap)
> > {
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > index a871ae7eb59e..45fcdfc8c035 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > @@ -332,6 +332,7 @@ void dw_pcie_version_detect(struct dw_pcie *pci);
> > u8 dw_pcie_find_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap);
> > u16 dw_pcie_find_ext_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap);
> > +u16 dw_pcie_msi_capabilities(struct dw_pcie *pci);
> > int dw_pcie_read(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 *val);
> > int dw_pcie_write(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 val);
Thanks,
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists