linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: amd: Disable and mask interrupts on resume

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:   Mon, 10 Apr 2023 00:03:31 -0500
From:   Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
To:     Kornel Dulęba <korneld@...omium.org>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        regressions@...mhuis.info
Cc:     Basavaraj Natikar <Basavaraj.Natikar@....com>,
        Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        upstream@...ihalf.com, rad@...ihalf.com, mattedavis@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: amd: Disable and mask interrupts on resume

On 3/20/23 04:32, Kornel Dulęba wrote:

> This fixes a similar problem to the one observed in:
> commit 4e5a04be88fe ("pinctrl: amd: disable and mask interrupts on probe").
>
> On some systems, during suspend/resume cycle firmware leaves
> an interrupt enabled on a pin that is not used by the kernel.
> This confuses the AMD pinctrl driver and causes spurious interrupts.
>
> The driver already has logic to detect if a pin is used by the kernel.
> Leverage it to re-initialize interrupt fields of a pin only if it's not
> used by us.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kornel Dulęba <korneld@...omium.org>
> ---
>   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++----------------
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c
> index 9236a132c7ba..609821b756c2 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-amd.c
> @@ -872,32 +872,34 @@ static const struct pinconf_ops amd_pinconf_ops = {
>   	.pin_config_group_set = amd_pinconf_group_set,
>   };
>   
> -static void amd_gpio_irq_init(struct amd_gpio *gpio_dev)
> +static void amd_gpio_irq_init_pin(struct amd_gpio *gpio_dev, int pin)
>   {
> -	struct pinctrl_desc *desc = gpio_dev->pctrl->desc;
> +	const struct pin_desc *pd;
>   	unsigned long flags;
>   	u32 pin_reg, mask;
> -	int i;
>   
>   	mask = BIT(WAKE_CNTRL_OFF_S0I3) | BIT(WAKE_CNTRL_OFF_S3) |
>   		BIT(INTERRUPT_MASK_OFF) | BIT(INTERRUPT_ENABLE_OFF) |
>   		BIT(WAKE_CNTRL_OFF_S4);
>   
> -	for (i = 0; i < desc->npins; i++) {
> -		int pin = desc->pins[i].number;
> -		const struct pin_desc *pd = pin_desc_get(gpio_dev->pctrl, pin);
> -
> -		if (!pd)
> -			continue;
> +	pd = pin_desc_get(gpio_dev->pctrl, pin);
> +	if (!pd)
> +		return;
>   
> -		raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_dev->lock, flags);
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_dev->lock, flags);
> +	pin_reg = readl(gpio_dev->base + pin * 4);
> +	pin_reg &= ~mask;
> +	writel(pin_reg, gpio_dev->base + pin * 4);
> +	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_dev->lock, flags);
> +}
>   
> -		pin_reg = readl(gpio_dev->base + i * 4);
> -		pin_reg &= ~mask;
> -		writel(pin_reg, gpio_dev->base + i * 4);
> +static void amd_gpio_irq_init(struct amd_gpio *gpio_dev)
> +{
> +	struct pinctrl_desc *desc = gpio_dev->pctrl->desc;
> +	int i;
>   
> -		raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&gpio_dev->lock, flags);
> -	}
> +	for (i = 0; i < desc->npins; i++)
> +		amd_gpio_irq_init_pin(gpio_dev, i);
>   }
>   
>   #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> @@ -950,8 +952,10 @@ static int amd_gpio_resume(struct device *dev)
>   	for (i = 0; i < desc->npins; i++) {
>   		int pin = desc->pins[i].number;
>   
> -		if (!amd_gpio_should_save(gpio_dev, pin))
> +		if (!amd_gpio_should_save(gpio_dev, pin)) {
> +			amd_gpio_irq_init_pin(gpio_dev, pin);
>   			continue;
> +		}
>   
>   		raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&gpio_dev->lock, flags);
>   		gpio_dev->saved_regs[i] |= readl(gpio_dev->base + pin * 4) & PIN_IRQ_PENDING;

Hello Kornel,

I've found that this commit which was included in 6.3-rc5 is causing a 
regression waking up from lid on a Lenovo Z13.

Reverting it on top of 6.3-rc6 resolves the problem.

I've collected what I can into this bug report:

https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217315

Linus Walleij,

It looks like this was CC to stable.  If we can't get a quick solution 
we might want to pull this from stable.

Thanks,