linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: qcom: Move qcom_pcie_icc_opp

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: <b2f4be6c-93d9-430b-974d-8df5f3c3b336@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 11:54:48 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@....qualcomm.com>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Wilczyński <kwilczynski@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Krishna Chaitanya Chundru <krishna.chundru@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: qcom: Move qcom_pcie_icc_opp_update() to
 notifier callback

On 7/14/25 8:01 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> It allows us to group all the settings that need to be done when a PCI
> device is attached to the bus in a single place.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@....qualcomm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> index b4993642ed90915299e825e47d282b8175a78346..b364977d78a2c659f65f0f12ce4274601d20eaa6 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> @@ -1616,8 +1616,6 @@ static irqreturn_t qcom_pcie_global_irq_thread(int irq, void *data)
>  		pci_lock_rescan_remove();
>  		pci_rescan_bus(pp->bridge->bus);
>  		pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
> -
> -		qcom_pcie_icc_opp_update(pcie);
>  	} else {
>  		dev_WARN_ONCE(dev, 1, "Received unknown event. INT_STATUS: 0x%08x\n",
>  			      status);
> @@ -1765,6 +1763,7 @@ static int pcie_qcom_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long action,
>  	switch (action) {
>  	case BUS_NOTIFY_BIND_DRIVER:
>  		qcom_pcie_enable_aspm(pdev);
> +		qcom_pcie_icc_opp_update(pcie);

So I assume that we're not exactly going to do much with the device if
there isn't a driver for it, but I have concerns that since the link
would already be established(?), the icc vote may be too low, especially
if the user uses something funky like UIO

Konrad