netdev - Re: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] bus: mhi: host: Import mux

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: <20240623134430.GD58184@thinkpad>
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 19:14:30 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com>
Cc: Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>,
	Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...aro.org>, ryazanov.s.a@...il.com,
	johannes@...solutions.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	mhi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] bus: mhi: host: Import mux_id item

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:17:16AM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
> 
> At 2024-06-14 22:31:03, "Jeffrey Hugo" <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com> wrote:
> >On 6/14/2024 4:17 AM, Loic Poulain wrote:
> >> On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 16:51, Manivannan Sadhasivam
> >> <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 08:19:13AM -0600, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> >>>> On 6/12/2024 3:46 AM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 05:38:42PM +0800, Slark Xiao wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Subject could be improved:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> bus: mhi: host: Add configurable mux_id for MBIM mode
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> For SDX72 MBIM mode, it starts data mux id from 112 instead of 0.
> >>>>>> This would lead to device can't ping outside successfully.
> >>>>>> Also MBIM side would report "bad packet session (112)".
> >>>>>> So we add a default mux_id value for SDX72. And this value
> >>>>>> would be transferred to wwan mbim side.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>    drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c | 3 +++
> >>>>>>    include/linux/mhi.h                | 2 ++
> >>>>>>    2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c
> >>>>>> index 0b483c7c76a1..9e9adf8320d2 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/host/pci_generic.c
> >>>>>> @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ struct mhi_pci_dev_info {
> >>>>>>            unsigned int dma_data_width;
> >>>>>>            unsigned int mru_default;
> >>>>>>            bool sideband_wake;
> >>>>>> + unsigned int mux_id;
> >>>>>>    };
> >>>>>>    #define MHI_CHANNEL_CONFIG_UL(ch_num, ch_name, el_count, ev_ring) \
> >>>>>> @@ -469,6 +470,7 @@ static const struct mhi_pci_dev_info mhi_foxconn_sdx72_info = {
> >>>>>>            .dma_data_width = 32,
> >>>>>>            .mru_default = 32768,
> >>>>>>            .sideband_wake = false,
> >>>>>> + .mux_id = 112,
> >>>>>>    };
> >>>>>>    static const struct mhi_channel_config mhi_mv3x_channels[] = {
> >>>>>> @@ -1035,6 +1037,7 @@ static int mhi_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id)
> >>>>>>            mhi_cntrl->runtime_get = mhi_pci_runtime_get;
> >>>>>>            mhi_cntrl->runtime_put = mhi_pci_runtime_put;
> >>>>>>            mhi_cntrl->mru = info->mru_default;
> >>>>>> + mhi_cntrl->link_id = info->mux_id;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Again, 'link_id' is just a WWAN term. Use 'mux_id' here also.
> >>>>
> >>>> Does this really belong in MHI?  If this was DT, I don't think we would put
> >>>> this value in DT, but rather have the driver (MBIM) detect the device and
> >>>> code in the required value.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I believe this is a modem value rather than MHI. But I was OK with keeping it in
> >>> MHI driver since we kind of keep modem specific config.
> >>>
> >>> But if WWAN can detect the device and apply the config, I'm all over it.
> >> 
> >> That would require at least some information from the MHI bus for the
> >> MBIM driver
> >> to make a decision, such as a generic device ID, or quirk flags...
> >
> >I don't see why.
> >
> >The "simple" way to do it would be to have the controller define a 
> >different channel name, and then have the MBIM driver probe on that. 
> >The MBIM driver could attach driver data saying that it needs to have a 
> >specific mux_id.
> >
> >Or, with zero MHI/Controller changes, the MBIM driver could parse the 
> >mhi_device struct, get to the struct device, for the underlying device, 
> >and extract the PCIe Device ID and match that to a white list of known 
> >devices that need this property.
> >
> >I guess if the controller could attach a private void * to the 
> >mhi_device that is opaque to MHI, but allows MBIM to make a decision, 
> >that would be ok.  Such a mechanism would be generic, and extensible to 
> >other usecases of the same "class".
> >
> >-Jeff
> 
> Hi guys,
> This patch mainly refer to the feature of mru setting between mhi and wwan side.
> We ransfer this value to wwan side if we define it in mhi side, otherwise a default
> value would be used in wwan side. Why don't we just align with that?
> 

Well, the problem is that MRU has nothing to do with MHI. I initially thought
that it could fit inside the controller config, but thinking more I agree with
Jeff that this doesn't belong to MHI at all.

At the same time, I also do not want to extract the PCI info from the client
drivers since the underlying transport could change with MHI. So the best
solution I can think of is exposing the modem name in 'mhi_controller_config' so
that the client drivers can do a match.

Please try to implement that.

- Mani

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்