| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 12:10:19 +0800
From: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc: adrian.hunter@...el.com, Victor Shih <victor.shih@...esyslogic.com.tw>,
Ben Chuang <benchuanggli@...il.com>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mmc: sdhci-pci-gli: GL975x: Mask rootport's replay
timer timeout during suspend
On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 6:53 PM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 at 04:23, Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com> wrote:
> >
> > Spamming `lspci -vv` can still observe the replay timer timeout error
> > even after commit 015c9cbcf0ad ("mmc: sdhci-pci-gli: GL9750: Mask the
> > replay timer timeout of AER"), albeit with a lower reproduce rate.
> >
> > Such AER interrupt can still prevent the system from suspending, so let
> > root port mask and unmask replay timer timeout during suspend and
> > resume, respectively.
> >
> > Cc: Victor Shih <victor.shih@...esyslogic.com.tw>
> > Cc: Ben Chuang <benchuanggli@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > - Change subject to reflect it works on GL9750 & GL9755
> > - Fix when aer_cap is missing
> >
> > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c
> > index 025b31aa712c..59ae4da72974 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-core.c
> > @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ static int sdhci_pci_init_wakeup(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > -static int sdhci_pci_suspend_host(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > +int sdhci_pci_suspend_host(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > {
> > int i, ret;
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> > index 77911a57b12c..54943e9df835 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> > @@ -1429,6 +1429,55 @@ static int sdhci_pci_gli_resume(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > return sdhci_pci_resume_host(chip);
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PCIEAER
> > +static void mask_replay_timer_timeout(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct pci_dev *parent = pci_upstream_bridge(pdev);
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + if (!parent || !parent->aer_cap)
>
> Wouldn't it be more correct to use pci_aer_available(), rather than
> just checking the aer_cap?
pci_aer_available() is more of a global check, so checking aer_cap is
still required for the device.
>
> If pci_aer_available() can be used, we wouldn't even need the stubs as
> the is already stubs for pci_aer_available().
A helper that checks both aer_cap and pci_aer_available() can be
added for such purpose, but there aren't many users of that.
Kai-Heng
>
> > + return;
> > +
> > + pci_read_config_dword(parent, parent->aer_cap + PCI_ERR_COR_MASK, &val);
> > + val |= PCI_ERR_COR_REP_TIMER;
> > + pci_write_config_dword(parent, parent->aer_cap + PCI_ERR_COR_MASK, val);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void unmask_replay_timer_timeout(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct pci_dev *parent = pci_upstream_bridge(pdev);
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + if (!parent || !parent->aer_cap)
> > + return;
> > +
> > + pci_read_config_dword(pdev, parent->aer_cap + PCI_ERR_COR_MASK, &val);
> > + val &= ~PCI_ERR_COR_REP_TIMER;
> > + pci_write_config_dword(pdev, parent->aer_cap + PCI_ERR_COR_MASK, val);
> > +}
> > +#else
> > +static inline void mask_replay_timer_timeout(struct pci_dev *pdev) { }
> > +static inline void unmask_replay_timer_timeout(struct pci_dev *pdev) { }
> > +#endif
> > +
> > +static int sdhci_pci_gl975x_suspend(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > + mask_replay_timer_timeout(chip->pdev);
> > +
> > + return sdhci_pci_suspend_host(chip);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int sdhci_pci_gl975x_resume(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = sdhci_pci_gli_resume(chip);
> > +
> > + unmask_replay_timer_timeout(chip->pdev);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int gl9763e_resume(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip)
> > {
> > struct sdhci_pci_slot *slot = chip->slots[0];
> > @@ -1547,7 +1596,8 @@ const struct sdhci_pci_fixes sdhci_gl9755 = {
> > .probe_slot = gli_probe_slot_gl9755,
> > .ops = &sdhci_gl9755_ops,
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> > - .resume = sdhci_pci_gli_resume,
> > + .suspend = sdhci_pci_gl975x_suspend,
> > + .resume = sdhci_pci_gl975x_resume,
> > #endif
> > };
> >
> > @@ -1570,7 +1620,8 @@ const struct sdhci_pci_fixes sdhci_gl9750 = {
> > .probe_slot = gli_probe_slot_gl9750,
> > .ops = &sdhci_gl9750_ops,
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> > - .resume = sdhci_pci_gli_resume,
> > + .suspend = sdhci_pci_gl975x_suspend,
> > + .resume = sdhci_pci_gl975x_resume,
> > #endif
> > };
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h
> > index 153704f812ed..19253dce687d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci.h
> > @@ -190,6 +190,7 @@ static inline void *sdhci_pci_priv(struct sdhci_pci_slot *slot)
> > }
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> > +int sdhci_pci_suspend_host(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip);
> > int sdhci_pci_resume_host(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip);
> > #endif
> > int sdhci_pci_enable_dma(struct sdhci_host *host);
>
> Kind regards
> Uffe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists