linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] platform/x86: intel_scu_ipc: Check status after timeouts in busy

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: <cd646546-47b2-4271-a7db-2ddd3571907d@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Aug 2023 07:15:11 -0700
From:   Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] platform/x86: intel_scu_ipc: Check status after
 timeouts in busy_loop()



On 8/30/2023 6:14 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> It's possible for the polling loop in busy_loop() to get scheduled away
> for a long time.
> 
>   status = ipc_read_status(scu);
>   <long time scheduled away>
>   if (!(status & IPC_STATUS_BUSY))
> 
> If this happens, then the status bit could change and this function
> would never test it again after checking the jiffies against the timeout
> limit. Polling code should check the condition one more time after the
> timeout in case this happens.

I think it is not checking the condition, but reading the status one more
time to reflect the latest status.

> 
> The read_poll_timeout() helper implements this logic, and is shorter, so
> simply use that helper here.
> 
> Cc: Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>
> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> Fixes: e7b7ab3847c9 ("platform/x86: intel_scu_ipc: Sleeping is fine when polling")
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
> ---

Otherwise code looks fine to me.

Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>


>  drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c
> index 6851d10d6582..5a37becc65aa 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_scu_ipc.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
>  #include <linux/init.h>
>  #include <linux/interrupt.h>
>  #include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/iopoll.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>  
> @@ -231,19 +232,15 @@ static inline u32 ipc_data_readl(struct intel_scu_ipc_dev *scu, u32 offset)
>  /* Wait till scu status is busy */
>  static inline int busy_loop(struct intel_scu_ipc_dev *scu)
>  {
> -	unsigned long end = jiffies + IPC_TIMEOUT;
> -
> -	do {
> -		u32 status;
> -
> -		status = ipc_read_status(scu);
> -		if (!(status & IPC_STATUS_BUSY))
> -			return (status & IPC_STATUS_ERR) ? -EIO : 0;
> +	u8 status;
> +	int err;
>  
> -		usleep_range(50, 100);
> -	} while (time_before(jiffies, end));
> +	err = read_poll_timeout(ipc_read_status, status, !(status & IPC_STATUS_BUSY),
> +				100, jiffies_to_usecs(IPC_TIMEOUT), false, scu);
> +	if (err)
> +		return err;
>  
> -	return -ETIMEDOUT;
> +	return (status & IPC_STATUS_ERR) ? -EIO : 0;
>  }
>  
>  /* Wait till ipc ioc interrupt is received or timeout in 10 HZ */

-- 
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer