netdev - Re: [PATCH] sfp: sfp_read: split-up request when hw rx buffer is too small.

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:   Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:15:10 +0000
From:   René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sfp: sfp_read: split-up request when hw rx buffer is
 too small.

Quoting Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>:

> On 1/23/19 1:20 PM, René van Dorst wrote:
>> Without this patch sfp code retries to read the full struct sfp_eeprom_id
>> id out of the SFP eeprom. Sizeof(id) is 96 bytes.
>> My i2c hardware, Mediatek mt7621, has a rx buffer of 64 bytes.
>> So sfp_read gets -NOSUPPORTED back on his turn return -EAGAIN.
>> Same issue is with the SFP_EXT_STATUS data which is 92 bytes.
>>
>> By split-up the request in multiple smaller requests with a max size of i2c
>> max_read_len, we can readout the SFP module successfully.
>>
>> Tested with MT7621 and two Fiberstore modules SFP-GB-GE-T and SFP-GE-BX.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/phy/sfp.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c
>> index fd8bb998ae52..1352a19571cd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c
>> @@ -367,7 +367,28 @@ static void sfp_set_state(struct sfp *sfp,  
>> unsigned int state)
>>
>>  static int sfp_read(struct sfp *sfp, bool a2, u8 addr, void *buf,  
>> size_t len)
>>  {
>> -	return sfp->read(sfp, a2, addr, buf, len);
>> +	const struct i2c_adapter_quirks *q = sfp->i2c->quirks;
>> +	int ret;
>> +	size_t rx_bytes = 0;
>> +
>> +	/* Many i2c hw have limited rx buffers, split-up request when needed. */
>> +	while ((q->max_read_len) && (len > q->max_read_len)) {
>> +		ret = sfp->read(sfp, a2, addr, buf, q->max_read_len);
>> +		if (ret < 0)
>> +			return ret;
>> +		rx_bytes += ret;
>> +		addr += q->max_read_len;
>> +		buf += q->max_read_len;
>> +		len -= q->max_read_len;
>> +	}
>
> sfp->read defaults to sfp_i2c_read() but it is possible to override that
> by registering a custom sfp_bus instance (nothing does it today, but
> that could obviously change), so there is no guarantee that
> sfp->i2c->quirks is applicable unless sfp_i2c_read() is used.
>
> sfp_i2c_read() is presumably where the max_read_len splitting should
> occur, or better yet, should not i2c_transfer() take care of that on its
> own? That way there would be no layering violation of having to fetch
> the quirk bitmask for the i2c adapter being used, that is something that
> should belong in the core i2c framework.

Yes it is better to put it in sfp_i2c_read().

I think it is best to handle the split-up within the driver.
The driver knows how to talk to the device and may apply device quirks.

Also tda1004x [0] and TPM [1] driver also handles it within the driver itself.

TPM driver just try to send the want size and split-up request to
I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX when a -EOPNOTSUPP returns, just retries it a number of
times.

I can do the same but I have to pick a minimum size.
Looking in SSF-8472rev12.2.1 they don't limit the way you access the device.
So use I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX of 32 bytes is sufficient or lookup the i2c
quirk max_read_len is also an option.

Grepping thru the i2c busses I see only 2 devices which has less then 32 bytes
of buffer. i2c-nvidia-gpu (Nvidia GPU) and i2c-pmcmsp (microcontroller  
MSP71xx).
Both are unlikely to be used for these kind of applications.

I think I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX is safe to use.

Greats,

René

[0]  
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.0-rc3/source/drivers/media/dvb-frontends/tda1004x.c#L319
[1]  
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.0-rc3/source/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_i2c_infineon.c#L158