linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1] ufs: poll HCS.UCRDY before issuing a UIC command

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <08bc0186-4684-2321-65d8-4c2ae622acea@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 11 May 2023 08:22:26 +0300
From:   Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:     Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
        avri.altman@....com, jejb@...ux.ibm.com,
        martin.petersen@...cle.com, beanhuo@...ron.com, sc.suh@...sung.com,
        hy50.seo@...sung.com, sh425.lee@...sung.com,
        kwangwon.min@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1] ufs: poll HCS.UCRDY before issuing a UIC command

On 9/05/23 11:24, Kiwoong Kim wrote:
> With auto hibern8 enabled, UIC could be working
> for a while to process a hibern8 operation and HCI
> reports UIC not ready for a short term through HCS.UCRDY.
> And UFS driver can't recognize the operation.
> UFSHCI spec specifies UCRDY like this:
> whether the host controller is ready to process UIC COMMAND
> 
> The 'ready' could be seen as many different meanings. If the meaning
> includes not processing any request from HCI, processing a hibern8
> operation can be 'not ready'. In this situation, the driver needs to
> wait until the operations is completed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kiwoong Kim <kwmad.kim@...sung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> index 96ce6af..fc79539 100644
> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
> @@ -2368,7 +2368,18 @@ static inline int ufshcd_hba_capabilities(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>   */
>  static inline bool ufshcd_ready_for_uic_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba)
>  {
> -	return ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS) & UIC_COMMAND_READY;
> +	ktime_t timeout = ktime_add_ms(ktime_get(), UIC_CMD_TIMEOUT);
> +	u32 val = 0;
> +
> +	do {
> +		val = ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_CONTROLLER_STATUS) &
> +			UIC_COMMAND_READY;
> +		if (val)
> +			break;
> +		usleep_range(500, 1000);

Pedantically, the sleep probably needs to be less than the
auto-hibernate idle timer period?

> +	} while (ktime_before(ktime_get(), timeout));

read_poll_timeout() would be a better choice for I/O polling

> +
> +	return val ? true : false;
>  }
>  
>  /**