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]
Date:	Tue, 14 May 2013 14:30:59 +0200
From:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
To:	<monstr@...str.eu>
CC:	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	<michal.simek@...inx.com>, <s.trumtrar@...gutronix.de>,
	<hein_tibosch@...oo.es>,
	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Anirudha Sarangi <anirudh@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/macb: fix ISR clear-on-write behavior only for some
 SoC

On 14/05/2013 13:38, Michal Simek :
> On 05/14/2013 11:16 AM, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>> On 13/05/2013 18:05, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD :
>>>
>>> On May 14, 2013, at 12:05 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Commit 749a2b6 (net/macb: clear tx/rx completion flags in ISR)
>>>> introduces clear-on-write on ISR register. This behavior is not always
>>>> implemented when using Cadence MACB/GEM and is breaking other platforms.
>>>> We are using a new Device Tree compatibility string and a capability
>>>> property to actually activate this clear-on-write behavior on ISR.
>>>>
>>>> Reported-by: Hein Tibosch <hein_tibosch@...oo.es>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
>>>
>>> can we detect it via the IP?
>>
>> As said by Hein, we cannot use the IP revision number. *But* we may have the opportunity to read this integration configuration in the Design Configuration Register 1 (DCFG1 already used for determining data bus width).
>>
>> So, Michal or Steffen, can you please tell me the value of:
>> -> bit 23 at register address 0x280: mine is "1" which should mean "IRQ read clear", yours should be "0".
>
> here is the whole reg map for zynq.
> Reg 0x280 is undocumented in our TRM.
> Please decode it not sure if bit 0 is LSB or MSB.

Bit 0 is LSB.

Value of DCFG1 is 0x02500111 so I read '0' for this value which should 
be good.

I write a new patch immediately.


> U-Boot-PetaLinux> md e000b000
> e000b000: 0000001c 000e0013 00000006 00000000    ................
> e000b010: 00180704 00000021 3ffba2e4 3ffbd32c    ....!......?,..?
> e000b020: 00000003 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b030: 07ffffff 63c66f08 00000000 0000ffff    .....o.c........
> e000b040: 000003ff 000003ff 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b050: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b060: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b070: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b080: 00000000 00000000 00350a00 00001c48    ..........5.H...
> e000b090: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b0a0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b0b0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b0c0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b0d0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b0e0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b0f0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00020118    ................
> U-Boot-PetaLinux>
> e000b100: 00014796 00000000 0000051e 00000001    .G..............
> e000b110: 00000000 00000000 0000051d 00000001    ................
> e000b120: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b130: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b140: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b150: 001e58b6 00000000 00000526 00000000    .X......&.......
> e000b160: 00000004 00000000 00000004 00000001    ................
> e000b170: 00000000 00000004 00000000 0000051d    ................
> e000b180: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b190: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b1a0: 00000038 00000000 00000000 00000000    8...............
> e000b1b0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b1c0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b1d0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b1e0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b1f0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> U-Boot-PetaLinux>
> e000b200: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b210: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b220: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b230: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b240: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b250: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b260: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b270: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b280: 02500111 2ab13fff 00000000 00000000    ..P..?.*........
> e000b290: 002f2145 00000200 00000000 00000000    E!/.............
> e000b2a0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b2b0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b2c0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b2d0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b2e0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> e000b2f0: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000    ................
> U-Boot-PetaLinux>
>
>
>
>>
>> Hein, in case of use of the MACB, we do not have this register included, so I will avoid to run the test when using MACB (we already have this information).
>>
>> If it works, I plan to rewrite the patch but taking this information instead of the device tree compatibility string.
>
> yep. Will be good to detect it instead of new compatible string.
>
> Also is there an option to remove "CONFIG_ARCH_AT91"?

Okay, I have a look at this as-well.

Best regards,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ