linux-kernel - PCIe coherency in spec (was: [RFC PATCH 2/2] drm/ttm: downgrade cached to write

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: <4c5e0f77-b24d-47dd-86d2-31cb8e44b42a@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 16:52:30 +0800
From: "Jiaxun Yang" <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>
To: Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
 "Icenowy Zheng" <uwu@...nowy.me>, "Huang Rui" <ray.huang@....com>,
 "Maarten Lankhorst" <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Maxime Ripard" <mripard@...nel.org>,
 "Thomas Zimmermann" <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 "David Airlie" <airlied@...il.com>, "Daniel Vetter" <daniel@...ll.ch>,
 bhelgaas@...gle.com
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: PCIe coherency in spec (was:  [RFC PATCH 2/2] drm/ttm: downgrade cached to
 write_combined when snooping not available)



在2024年7月2日七月 下午6:03，Jiaxun Yang写道：
> 在2024年7月2日七月 下午5:27，Christian König写道：
>> Am 02.07.24 um 11:06 schrieb Icenowy Zheng:
>>> [SNIP] However I don't think the definition of the AGP spec could apply on all
>>> PCI(e) implementations. The AGP spec itself don't apply on
>>> implementations that do not implement AGP (which is the most PCI(e)
>>> implementations today), and it's not in the reference list of the PCIe
>>> spec, so it does no help on this context. 
>> No, exactly that is not correct.
>>
>> See as I explained the No-Snoop extension to PCIe was created to help 
>> with AGP support and later merged into the base PCIe specification.
>>
>> So the AGP spec is now part of the PCIe spec.

Hi Bjorn & linux-pci folks,

It seems like we have some disputes on interpretation pf PCIe specification.

We are seeking your expertise on the question: Does PCIe specification mandate Cache
coherency via snoop?

There are some further context in this thread [1].

[1]:  https://lore.kernel.org/all/0db974d40cd8c5dcc723d43c328bac923e0fe33a.camel@icenowy.me/
Thanks
- Jiaxun

>
> We don't really buy this theory.
>
> Keyword "AGP" doesn't appear in "PCI Express Base 4.0 Base Specification" even
> once.
>
> If PCIe is a predecessor of AGP, where does AGP specific software interface like
>  AGP aperture goes? PCIe GPUs are only borrowing software concepts from AGP,
> but they didn't inherit any hardware properties.
>
> [...]
>> We seem to have a misunderstanding here, this is not a software issue. 
>> The hardware platform is considered broken by the hardware vendor!
>
> It's up to the specification text to define compliance means. So far as 
> per analysis
> from Icenowy of PCIe specification text itself it's not prohibited.
>
>>
>> In other words people have stitched together hardware in a way which is 
>> not supported by the creator of that hardware.
>>
>> So as long as you can't convince anybody from ARM or the RISC-V team or 
>> whoever created that hardware to confirm that the hardware actually 
>> works you won't get any support for that.
>
> Well we are trying to support them on our own in mainline, we are not asking
> for any support.
>
> Thanks
> - Jiaxun
>>
>> Regards,
>> Christian.
>
> -- 
> - Jiaxun

-- 
- Jiaxun