linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: lpi2c: cache peripheral clock rate

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: <20230502-grueling-plural-694f7fc7c9ff-mkl@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Tue, 2 May 2023 09:03:39 +0200
From:   Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To:     Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tq-group.com>
Cc:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
        "A. Sverdlin" <alexander.sverdlin@...mens.com>,
        Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: lpi2c: cache peripheral clock rate

On 02.05.2023 08:50:06, Alexander Stein wrote:
> Hello Wolfgang,
> 
> Am Sonntag, 30. April 2023, 09:05:55 CEST schrieb Wolfram Sang:
> > * PGP Signed by an unknown key
> > 
> > > > IIRC this is a general problem^w limitation of the clock framework,
> > > > clock providers cannot use clocks themselves in certain callback, e.g.
> > > > set_rate.
> > > 
> > > Well, that's essentially impossible when this clock provider is attached
> > > via i2c. i2c transfers potentially need to change or prepare clocks.
> > 
> > So, as I get it, this is not a specific lpi2c problem but affecting any
> > I2C controller driver which uses get_rate() to setup a transfer to a
> > remote I2C clock provider? And this lockdep warning is a false-positive?
> 
> Yes, IMHO this could potentially occur on every I2C controller driver, if a 
> clock provider while holding the clk_prepare_lock, e.g. during registration, 
> issues an i2c transfer.
> I'm not so sure if this is a false-positive, but more like trying to do a 
> nested lock.

It's a general limitation of the clock framework. The clk_prepare_lock()
is taken by clk_prepare() and by clk_get_rate(). So if you implement a
clock provider driver that uses I2C, which might use clk_get_rate() it
might deadlock. However there's a workaround for nested I2C calls:
533ddeb1e86f "(clk: allow reentrant calls into the clk framework,
2013-03-28)". This doesn't work for SPI, as it's using a worker thread.

| https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3/source/drivers/clk/clk.c#L128

regards,
Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                 | Marc Kleine-Budde          |
Embedded Linux                   | https://www.pengutronix.de |
Vertretung Nürnberg              | Phone: +49-5121-206917-129 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-9   |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)