linux-kernel - Re: [patch 12/33] PCI/MSI: Add support for per device MSI[X] domains

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]

Date:   Wed, 16 Nov 2022 15:13:04 -0400
From:   Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>, Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us>,
        Allen Hubbe <allenbh@...il.com>,
        "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 12/33] PCI/MSI: Add support for per device MSI[X] domains

On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 02:58:30PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> +static struct msi_domain_template pci_msi_template = {
> +	.chip = {
> +		.name			= "PCI-MSI",
> +		.irq_mask		= pci_mask_msi,
> +		.irq_unmask		= pci_unmask_msi,
> +		.irq_write_msi_msg	= pci_msi_domain_write_msg,
> +		.flags			= IRQCHIP_ONESHOT_SAFE,
> +	},
> +
> +	.ops = {
> +		.set_desc		= pci_device_domain_set_desc,
> +	},
> +
> +	.info = {
> +		.flags			= MSI_COMMON_FLAGS | MSI_FLAG_MULTI_PCI_MSI,
> +		.bus_token		= DOMAIN_BUS_PCI_DEVICE_MSI,
> +	},
> +};
> +
> +static void pci_mask_msix(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> +	pci_msix_mask(irq_data_get_msi_desc(data));
> +}
> +
> +static void pci_unmask_msix(struct irq_data *data)
> +{
> +	pci_msix_unmask(irq_data_get_msi_desc(data));
> +}
> +
> +static struct msi_domain_template pci_msix_template = {
> +	.chip = {
> +		.name			= "PCI-MSIX",
> +		.irq_mask		= pci_mask_msix,
> +		.irq_unmask		= pci_unmask_msix,
> +		.irq_write_msi_msg	= pci_msi_domain_write_msg,
> +		.flags			= IRQCHIP_ONESHOT_SAFE,
> +	},
> +
> +	.ops = {
> +		.set_desc		= pci_device_domain_set_desc,
> +	},
> +
> +	.info = {
> +		.flags			= MSI_COMMON_FLAGS | MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX,
> +		.bus_token		= DOMAIN_BUS_PCI_DEVICE_MSIX,
> +	},
> +};

I like this splitting alot, it makes the whole thing make so much more
sense.

> +bool pci_setup_msi_device_domain(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> +	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(pdev->msix_enabled))
> +		return false;
> +
> +	if (pci_match_device_domain(pdev, DOMAIN_BUS_PCI_DEVICE_MSI))
> +		return true;
> +	if (pci_match_device_domain(pdev, DOMAIN_BUS_PCI_DEVICE_MSIX))
> +		msi_remove_device_irq_domain(&pdev->dev, MSI_DEFAULT_DOMAIN);
> +
> +	return pci_create_device_domain(pdev, &pci_msi_template, 1);

Hardwired to one 1? What about multi-msi?

Jason