linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 18/20] RISC-V: Add ACPI initialization in setup

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: <b38179fe-f1b8-4146-ae22-11e8bbbd500e@spud>
Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 21:17:34 +0000
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>
Cc:     linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>,
        'Conor Dooley ' <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 18/20] RISC-V: Add ACPI initialization in setup_arch()

On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 07:06:45PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> Initialize the ACPI core for RISC-V during boot.
> 
> ACPI tables and interpreter are initialized based on
> the information passed from the firmware and the value of
> the kernel parameter 'acpi'.
> 
> With ACPI support added for RISC-V, the kernel parameter 'acpi'
> is also supported on RISC-V. Hence, update the documentation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>
> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
> ---

> +static int __init acpi_fadt_sanity_check(void)
> +{
> +	struct acpi_table_header *table;
> +	struct acpi_table_fadt *fadt;
> +	acpi_status status;
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * FADT is required on riscv; retrieve it to check its presence
> +	 * and carry out revision and ACPI HW reduced compliancy tests
> +	 */
> +	status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_FADT, 0, &table);
> +	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> +		const char *msg = acpi_format_exception(status);
> +
> +		pr_err("Failed to get FADT table, %s\n", msg);
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +	}
> +
> +	fadt = (struct acpi_table_fadt *)table;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Revision in table header is the FADT Major revision, and there
> +	 * is a minor revision of FADT.

What is the point of this part of the comment? Isn't it obvious from the
below code that you expect a major and minor revision?
If feel like you're trying to make a point in it, but the point has been
lost :/

> +	 *
> +	 * TODO: Currently, we check for 6.5 as the minimum version to check
> +	 * for HW_REDUCED flag. However, once RISC-V updates are released in
> +	 * the ACPI spec, we need to update this check for exact minor revision
> +	 */
> +	if (table->revision < 6 || (table->revision == 6 && fadt->minor_revision < 5)) {
> +		pr_err(FW_BUG "Unsupported FADT revision %d.%d, should be 6.5+\n",
> +		       table->revision, fadt->minor_revision);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (!(fadt->flags & ACPI_FADT_HW_REDUCED)) {
> +		pr_err("FADT not ACPI hardware reduced compliant\n");
> +		ret = -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * acpi_get_table() creates FADT table mapping that
> +	 * should be released after parsing and before resuming boot
> +	 */
> +	acpi_put_table(table);
> +	return ret;
> +}

> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> index 2d45a416d283..7b2b065a9f70 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>   *  Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>
>   */
>  
> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
>  #include <linux/init.h>
>  #include <linux/mm.h>
>  #include <linux/memblock.h>
> @@ -276,14 +277,22 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
>  
>  	efi_init();
>  	paging_init();
> -#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BUILTIN_DTB)
> -	unflatten_and_copy_device_tree();
> -#else
> -	if (early_init_dt_verify(__va(XIP_FIXUP(dtb_early_pa))))
> -		unflatten_device_tree();
> -	else
> -		pr_err("No DTB found in kernel mappings\n");
> -#endif
> +
> +	/* Parse the ACPI tables for possible boot-time configuration */
> +	acpi_boot_table_init();
> +	if (acpi_disabled) {
> +		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BUILTIN_DTB)) {
> +			unflatten_and_copy_device_tree();
> +		} else {
> +			if (early_init_dt_verify(__va(XIP_FIXUP(dtb_early_pa))))
> +				unflatten_device_tree();
> +			else
> +				pr_err("No DTB found in kernel mappings\n");
> +		}
> +	} else {
> +		early_init_dt_verify(__va(XIP_FIXUP(dtb_early_pa)));
> +	}
> +
>  	early_init_fdt_scan_reserved_mem();
>  	misc_mem_init();

Thanks for removing the ifdeffery :)
Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>

Thanks,
Conor.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)