| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZWoBqs/5m6tCuBGo@trax>
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 16:54:18 +0100
From: "Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries" <jorge@...ndries.io>
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Cc: "Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries" <jorge@...ndries.io>,
CLoehle@...erstone.com, jinpu.wang@...os.com, hare@...e.de,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, beanhuo@...ron.com,
yangyingliang@...wei.com, asuk4.q@...il.com, yibin.ding@...soc.com,
victor.shih@...esyslogic.com.tw, marex@...x.de,
rafael.beims@...adex.com, robimarko@...il.com,
ricardo@...ndries.io, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] mmc: rpmb: add quirk MMC_QUIRK_BROKEN_RPMB_RETUNE
On 01/12/23 13:46:25, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 1/12/23 09:40, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries wrote:
> > On 30/11/23 23:19:45, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries wrote:
> >> On 30/11/23 23:02:15, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries wrote:
> >>> On 30/11/23 21:12:28, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >>>> On 30/11/23 15:24, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz, Foundries wrote:
> >>>>> On 30/11/23 11:34:18, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 17:05, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge@...ndries.io> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On the eMMC SanDisk iNAND 7250 configured with HS200, requesting a
> >>>>>>> re-tune before switching to the RPMB partition would randomly cause
> >>>>>>> subsequent RPMB requests to fail with EILSEQ:
> >>>>>>> * data error -84, tigggered in __mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd()
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This commit skips the retune when switching to RPMB.
> >>>>>>> Tested over several days with per minute RPMB reads.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This sounds weird to me and needs more testing/debugging in my
> >>>>>> opinion, especially at the host driver level. Perhaps add some new
> >>>>>> tests in mmc_test, that does a partition switch to/from any partition
> >>>>>> and then run regular I/O again to see if the problem is easier to
> >>>>>> reproduce?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> hi Uffe
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ok I'll have a look - I have never used this driver before, so if you
> >>>>> have anything in the works I'll be glad to integrated and adapt.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The point is, I wonder what is so special with RPMB here? Note that,
> >>>>>> it has been quite common that host drivers/controllers have had issues
> >>>>>> with their tuning support, so I would not be surprised if that is the
> >>>>>> case here too.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Right, it is just that the tuning function for of-arasan is the generic
> >>>>> __sdhci_execute_tuning() - only wrapped around arasan DLL reset
> >>>>> calls. Hence why I aimed for the card: __sdhci_execute_tuning and ZynqMP
> >>>>> are not recent functions or architectures.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Certainly I would be surprised if the problem is at
> >>>>>> the eMMC card side, but I may be wrong.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> How do maintainers test the tuning methods? is there anything else for
> >>>>> me to do other than forcing a retune with different partitions?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Kind regards
> >>>>>> Uffe
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For completeness this is the error message - notice that we have a
> >>>>> trusted application (fiovb) going through OP-TEE and back to the TEE
> >>>>> supplicant issuing an rpmb read of a variable (pretty normal these days,
> >>>>> we use it on many different platforms - ST, NXP, AMD/Xilinx, TI..).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The issue on this Zynqmp platform is scarily simple to reproduce; you
> >>>>> can ignore the OP-TEE trace, it is just the TEE way of reporting that
> >>>>> the RPMB read failed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> root@...cg-dwg-sec:/var/rootdirs/home/fio# fiovb_printenv m4hash
> >>>>> [ 461.775084] sdhci-arasan ff160000.mmc: __mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd: data error -84
> >>>>> E/TC:? 0
> >>>>> E/TC:? 0 TA panicked with code 0xffff0000
> >>>>> E/LD: Status of TA 22250a54-0bf1-48fe-8002-7b20f1c9c9b1
> >>>>> E/LD: arch: aarch64
> >>>>> E/LD: region 0: va 0xc0004000 pa 0x7e200000 size 0x002000 flags rw-s (ldelf)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 1: va 0xc0006000 pa 0x7e202000 size 0x008000 flags r-xs (ldelf)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 2: va 0xc000e000 pa 0x7e20a000 size 0x001000 flags rw-s (ldelf)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 3: va 0xc000f000 pa 0x7e20b000 size 0x004000 flags rw-s (ldelf)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 4: va 0xc0013000 pa 0x7e20f000 size 0x001000 flags r--s
> >>>>> E/LD: region 5: va 0xc0014000 pa 0x7e22c000 size 0x005000 flags rw-s (stack)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 6: va 0xc0019000 pa 0x816b31fc8 size 0x001000 flags rw-- (param)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 7: va 0xc001a000 pa 0x816aa1fc8 size 0x002000 flags rw-- (param)
> >>>>> E/LD: region 8: va 0xc006b000 pa 0x00001000 size 0x014000 flags r-xs [0]
> >>>>> E/LD: region 9: va 0xc007f000 pa 0x00015000 size 0x008000 flags rw-s [0]
> >>>>> E/LD: [0] 22250a54-0bf1-48fe-8002-7b20f1c9c9b1 @ 0xc006b000
> >>>>> E/LD: Call stack:
> >>>>> E/LD: 0xc006de58
> >>>>> E/LD: 0xc006b388
> >>>>> E/LD: 0xc006ed40
> >>>>> E/LD: 0xc006b624
> >>>>> Read persistent value for m4hash failed: Exec format error
> >>>>
> >>>> Have you tried dynamic debug for mmc
> >>>>
> >>>> Kernel must be configured:
> >>>>
> >>>> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y
> >>>>
> >>>> To enable mmc debug via sysfs:
> >>>>
> >>>> echo 'file drivers/mmc/core/* +p' > /sys/kernel/debug/dynamic_debug/control
> >>>> echo 'file drivers/mmc/host/* +p' > /sys/kernel/debug/dynamic_debug/control
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> hi Adrian
> >>>
> >>> Sure, this is the output of the trace:
> >>>
> >>> [ 422.018756] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.018789] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.018817] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.018848] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.018875] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.018902] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.018932] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.020013] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.020027] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000002
> >>> [ 422.020034] mmc0: req done (CMD6): 0: 00000800 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.020054] mmc0: starting CMD13 arg 00010000 flags 00000195
> >>> [ 422.020068] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.020076] mmc0: req done (CMD13): 0: 00000900 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.020092] <mmc0: starting CMD23 arg 00000001 flags 00000015>
> >>> [ 422.020101] mmc0: starting CMD25 arg 00000000 flags 00000035
> >>> [ 422.020108] mmc0: blksz 512 blocks 1 flags 00000100 tsac 400 ms nsac 0
> >>> [ 422.020124] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.021671] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000002
> >>> [ 422.021691] mmc0: req done <CMD23>: 0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.021700] mmc0: req done (CMD25): 0: 00000900 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.021708] mmc0: 512 bytes transferred: 0
> >>> [ 422.021728] mmc0: starting CMD13 arg 00010000 flags 00000195
> >>> [ 422.021743] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.021752] mmc0: req done (CMD13): 0: 00000900 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.021771] <mmc0: starting CMD23 arg 00000001 flags 00000015>
> >>> [ 422.021779] mmc0: starting CMD18 arg 00000000 flags 00000035
> >>> [ 422.021785] mmc0: blksz 512 blocks 1 flags 00000200 tsac 100 ms nsac 0
> >>> [ 422.021804] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.022566] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00208000 <---------------------------------- this doesnt seem right
> >>> [ 422.022629] mmc0: req done <CMD23>: 0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.022639] mmc0: req done (CMD18): 0: 00000900 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.022647] mmc0: 0 bytes transferred: -84 < --------------------------------- it should have transfered 4096 bytes
> >>> [ 422.022669] sdhci-arasan ff160000.mmc: __mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd: data error -84
> >>> [ 422.029619] mmc0: starting CMD6 arg 03b30001 flags 0000049d
> >>> [ 422.029636] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.029652] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000002
> >>> [ 422.029660] mmc0: req done (CMD6): 0: 00000800 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.029680] mmc0: starting CMD13 arg 00010000 flags 00000195
> >>> [ 422.029693] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000001
> >>> [ 422.029702] mmc0: req done (CMD13): 0: 00000900 00000000 00000000 00000000
> >>> [ 422.196996] <mmc0: starting CMD23 arg 00000400 flags 00000015>
> >>> [ 422.197051] mmc0: starting CMD25 arg 058160e0 flags 000000b5
> >>> [ 422.197079] mmc0: blksz 512 blocks 1024 flags 00000100 tsac 400 ms nsac 0
> >>> [ 422.197110] mmc0: CMD12 arg 00000000 flags 0000049d
> >>> [ 422.199455] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199526] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199585] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199641] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199695] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199753] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199811] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199865] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199919] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.199972] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>> [ 422.200026] mmc0: sdhci: IRQ status 0x00000020
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> does this help?
> >
> > Just asking because it doesn't mean much to me other than the obvious CRC
> > problem.
> >
> > Being this issue so easy to trigger - and to fix - indicates a problem
> > on the card more than on the algorithm (otherwise faults would be all
> > over the place). But I am not an expert on this area.
> >
> > any additional suggestions welcome.
>
> My guess is that sometimes tuning produces a "bad" result. Perhaps
> the margins are very tight and the difference is only 1 tap. When
> a "bad" result happens in non-RPMB, a CRC error results in re-tuning
> and retry, so no errors are seen. When it happens in RPMB, that is
> not possible, so the error is obvious. Not re-tuning before RPMB
> switch helps because the CRC-error->re-tuning to a "good" result has
> probably already happened.
>
> However, based on that theory, it is not necessary the eMMC that is
> at fault.
>
> It may be worth considering a stronger eMMC driver strength setting.
sure I can tune the value (just building now). however I am not sure
about the implications - is there any negative consequence of increasing
this value that I could monitor (if tests pass)?
>
> sdhci supports err_stats in debugfs - that may show how many CRC
> errors there are when not accessing RPMB.
ok
>
> I don't object to skipping re-tuning before RPMB switch, but I am
> not sure about tying it to a specific eMMC.
thanks. will follow up after further testing.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists