linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] iommu/qcom: Use the asid read from device-tree if specified

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:   Tue, 7 Mar 2023 18:44:21 +0200
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, agross@...nel.org
Cc:     andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, joro@...tes.org,
        will@...nel.org, robin.murphy@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robdclark@...il.com,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, kernel@...labora.com,
        luca@...tu.xyz, a39.skl@...il.com, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] iommu/qcom: Use the asid read from device-tree if
 specified

On 15/11/2022 12:11, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> As specified in this driver, the context banks are 0x1000 apart but
> on some SoCs the context number does not necessarily match this
> logic, hence we end up using the wrong ASID: keeping in mind that
> this IOMMU implementation relies heavily on SCM (TZ) calls, it is
> mandatory that we communicate the right context number.
> 
> Since this is all about how context banks are mapped in firmware,
> which may be board dependent (as a different firmware version may
> eventually change the expected context bank numbers), introduce a
> new property "qcom,ctx-num": when found, the ASID will be forced
> as read from the devicetree.
> 
> When "qcom,ctx-num" is not found, this driver retains the previous
> behavior as to avoid breaking older devicetrees or systems that do
> not require forcing ASID numbers.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
> [Marijn: Rebased over next-20221111]
> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> ---
>   drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c
> index bfd7b51eb5db..491a8093f3d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c
> +++ b/drivers/iommu/arm/arm-smmu/qcom_iommu.c
> @@ -551,7 +551,8 @@ static int qcom_iommu_of_xlate(struct device *dev, struct of_phandle_args *args)
>   	 * index into qcom_iommu->ctxs:
>   	 */
>   	if (WARN_ON(asid < 1) ||
> -	    WARN_ON(asid > qcom_iommu->num_ctxs)) {
> +	    WARN_ON(asid > qcom_iommu->num_ctxs) ||
> +	    WARN_ON(qcom_iommu->ctxs[asid - 1] == NULL)) {

Separate change in my opinion. Please split it to a separate patch with 
proper Fixes: tag.

>   		put_device(&iommu_pdev->dev);
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   	}
> @@ -638,7 +639,8 @@ static int qcom_iommu_sec_ptbl_init(struct device *dev)
>   
>   static int get_asid(const struct device_node *np)
>   {
> -	u32 reg;
> +	u32 reg, val;
> +	int asid;
>   
>   	/* read the "reg" property directly to get the relative address
>   	 * of the context bank, and calculate the asid from that:
> @@ -646,7 +648,17 @@ static int get_asid(const struct device_node *np)
>   	if (of_property_read_u32_index(np, "reg", 0, &reg))
>   		return -ENODEV;
>   
> -	return reg / 0x1000;      /* context banks are 0x1000 apart */
> +	/*
> +	 * Context banks are 0x1000 apart but, in some cases, the ASID
> +	 * number doesn't match to this logic and needs to be passed
> +	 * from the DT configuration explicitly.
> +	 */
> +	if (of_property_read_u32(np, "qcom,ctx-num", &val))
> +		asid = reg / 0x1000;
> +	else
> +		asid = val;

As a matter of preference (and logic) I'd have written that as:

if (!of_property_read(np, "qcom,ctx-num", &val))
     asid = val;
else
     asid = reg / 0x1000;

LGTM otherwise

> +
> +	return asid;
>   }
>   
>   static int qcom_iommu_ctx_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry