[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87il41jy48.ffs@tglx>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 11:12:23 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
rdunlap@...radead.org, ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
treding@...dia.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, sdonthineni@...dia.com,
kthota@...dia.com, mmaddireddy@...dia.com, vidyas@...dia.com,
sagar.tv@...il.com, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] PCI/MSI: Fix MSI hwirq truncation
On Mon, Jan 08 2024 at 17:35, Vidya Sagar wrote:
> While calculating the hwirq number for an MSI interrupt, the higher
> bits (i.e. from bit-5 onwards a.k.a domain_nr >= 32) of the PCI domain
> number gets truncated because of the shifted value casting to u32. This
> for example is resulting in same hwirq number for devices 0019:00:00.0
> and 0039:00:00.0.
>
> So, cast the PCI domain number to u64 before left shifting it to
> calculate hwirq number.
>
> Fixes: 3878eaefb89a ("PCI/MSI: Enhance core to support hierarchy irqdomain")
> Signed-off-by: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>
> ---
> V2:
> * Added Fixes tag
>
> drivers/pci/msi/irqdomain.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi/irqdomain.c b/drivers/pci/msi/irqdomain.c
> index c8be056c248d..cfd84a899c82 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi/irqdomain.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi/irqdomain.c
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static irq_hw_number_t pci_msi_domain_calc_hwirq(struct msi_desc *desc)
>
> return (irq_hw_number_t)desc->msi_index |
> pci_dev_id(dev) << 11 |
> - (pci_domain_nr(dev->bus) & 0xFFFFFFFF) << 27;
> + ((irq_hw_number_t)(pci_domain_nr(dev->bus) & 0xFFFFFFFF)) << 27;
This is not casting to u64. It's casting to unsigned long:
typedef unsigned long irq_hw_number_t;
So this works only correctly on 64bit. On 32bit kernels unsigned long is
still 32bit. It's probably arguable that the 32bit case is not a
problem, but the changelog and the change do not match. This needs a
proper explanation why we don't care about this on 32bit.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists