linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] gpio: Add support for Intel LJCA USB GPIO driver

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: <CACRpkdYQfT=JXvmjKR_9O74H2dmwx1EF4QjCHM6fKAetpbrMOg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Mar 2023 15:18:53 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>, Ye Xiang <xiang.ye@...el.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
        Tyrone Ting <kfting@...oton.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com, heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com,
        sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com, zhifeng.wang@...el.com,
        wentong.wu@...el.com, lixu.zhang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] gpio: Add support for Intel LJCA USB GPIO driver

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:53 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 02:40:10PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > On 09.03.23 08:10, Ye Xiang wrote:
> >
> > > +#define LJCA_GPIO_BUF_SIZE 60
> > > +struct ljca_gpio_dev {
> > > +   struct platform_device *pdev;
> > > +   struct gpio_chip gc;
> > > +   struct ljca_gpio_info *gpio_info;
> > > +   DECLARE_BITMAP(unmasked_irqs, LJCA_MAX_GPIO_NUM);
> > > +   DECLARE_BITMAP(enabled_irqs, LJCA_MAX_GPIO_NUM);
> > > +   DECLARE_BITMAP(reenable_irqs, LJCA_MAX_GPIO_NUM);
> > > +   u8 *connect_mode;
> > > +   /* mutex to protect irq bus */
> > > +   struct mutex irq_lock;
> > > +   struct work_struct work;
> > > +   /* lock to protect package transfer to Hardware */
> > > +   struct mutex trans_lock;
> > > +
> > > +   u8 obuf[LJCA_GPIO_BUF_SIZE];
> > > +   u8 ibuf[LJCA_GPIO_BUF_SIZE];
> >
> > And here we have a violation of DMA coherency rules.
> > Basically you cannot embed buffers into other data structures
> > if they can be subject to DMA.
>
> Huh?!
>
> The problem here is alignment. But other than that I can't see the issue with
> embedding into structures the instances of which will be allocated on the heap.

Yups. And I think the solution looks something like this:

u8 obuf[LJCA_GPIO_BUF_SIZE] __aligned(8);
u8 ibuf[LJCA_GPIO_BUF_SIZE] __aligned(8);

__aligned(4) if it's 32bit DMA I guess? 8 always works that's
why we use it all over the IIO subsystem.

Yours,
Linus Walleij