2:18 a.m.
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann(a)hpe.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 12:15:14PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann(a)hpe.com> wrote:
> > Add ioctl command ND_CMD_CALL_DSM to acpi_nfit_ctl and __nd_ioctl which
> > allow kernel to call a nvdimm's _DSM as a passthru without using the
> > marshaling code of the nd_cmd_desc.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann(a)hpe.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/nfit.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> > drivers/nvdimm/bus.c | 43 +++++++++++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 166 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/nfit.c b/drivers/acpi/nfit.c
> > index d0f35e6..9511ab4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/nfit.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/nfit.c
> > @@ -56,6 +56,21 @@ struct nfit_table_prev {
> > struct list_head flushes;
> > };
> >
> > +struct cmd_family_tbl {
> > + enum nfit_uuids key_uuid; /* Internal handle */
> > + int key_type; /* Exported handle */
> > + int rev; /* _DSM rev */
> > + u64 mask; /* 0 bit excludes underlying func.*/
> > +};
> > +
> > +struct cmd_family_tbl nfit_cmd_family_tbl[] = {
> > + { NFIT_DEV_BUS, ND_TYPE_BUS, 1, ~0UL},
>
> Per the comment on patch2 lets kill this for now.
>
> > + { NFIT_DEV_DIMM, ND_TYPE_DIMM_INTEL1, 1, ~0UL},
> > + { NFIT_DEV_DIMM_N_HPE1, ND_TYPE_DIMM_N_HPE1, 1, ~0UL},
> > + { NFIT_DEV_DIMM_N_HPE2, ND_TYPE_DIMM_N_HPE2, 1, ~0UL},
>
> Why does the mask default to all supported? I assume this should be
> the known-valid mask for each type, i.e. 0x3fe for
> ND_TYPE_DIMM_INTEL1.
innocent until proven guilty.
This mask is bit and'd with mask returned by firmware, so mask
returned by firmware limits callers to those function firmware
supports.
My having this extra mask, it allows kernel a way to prevent user space
application from calling a certain function totally. e.g. if we
found that a function is dangerous or something that couldn't be
coordinated with the kernel's use of the function.
We should wait to cross that bridge when we come to it, not pre-create
infrastructure without a user. However, we can already re-purpose
this for limiting the supported functions to the ones listed in the
specification. I.e. the kernel rejects undocumented commands by
default.
By not restricting it to currently defined functions, it allow
testing
firmware that might be implemented a new function w/o having to give
firmware team a special kernel.
No, the kernel is not going to carry support for undefined function
codes on the chance that maybe firmware wants to test with it at some
point down the road. Just provide the firmware team a local kernel
build.
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * determine if the _DSM specified by UUID is supported and return
> > + * mask of supported functions in nd_cmd_mask.
> > + */
> > +
> > +static int acpi_nfit_sup_func(acpi_handle handle, const u8 *uuid,
> > + int rev, unsigned long *nd_cmd_mask)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > + u64 mask = 0;
> > + union acpi_object *obj;
> > +
> > + obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm(handle, uuid, rev, 0, NULL);
> > + if (!obj)
> > + return 0;
> > + /* For compatibility, old BIOSes may return an integer */
> > + if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER)
> > + mask = obj->integer.value;
> > + else if (obj->type == ACPI_TYPE_BUFFER)
> > + for (i = 0; i < obj->buffer.length && i < 8;
i++)
> > + mask |= (((u8)obj->buffer.pointer[i]) << (i *
8));
> > + ACPI_FREE(obj);
> > +
> > + *nd_cmd_mask = mask;
> > +
> > + return !!mask;
> > +}
> > +
> > +
> > +static inline void
> > +to_nfit_uuid_msk(acpi_handle handle, struct cmd_family_tbl *tbl,
> > + u8 const **cmd_uuid, unsigned long *cmd_mask)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long mask = 0;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; tbl[i].key_uuid >= 0 ; i++) {
> > + const u8 *uuid = to_nfit_uuid(tbl[i].key_uuid);
> > + int rev = tbl[i].rev;
> > +
> > + if (acpi_nfit_sup_func(handle, uuid, rev, &mask)) {
> > + *cmd_mask = mask & tbl[i].mask;
> > + *cmd_uuid = uuid;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > static int acpi_nfit_add_dimm(struct acpi_nfit_desc *acpi_desc,
> > struct nfit_mem *nfit_mem, u32 device_handle)
> > {
> > struct acpi_device *adev, *adev_dimm;
> > struct device *dev = acpi_desc->dev;
> > - const u8 *uuid = to_nfit_uuid(NFIT_DEV_DIMM);
> > - int i;
> >
> > nfit_mem->dsm_mask = acpi_desc->dimm_dsm_force_en;
> > adev = to_acpi_dev(acpi_desc);
> > @@ -939,9 +1045,8 @@ static int acpi_nfit_add_dimm(struct acpi_nfit_desc
*acpi_desc,
> > return force_enable_dimms ? 0 : -ENODEV;
> > }
> >
> > - for (i = ND_CMD_SMART; i <= ND_CMD_VENDOR; i++)
> > - if (acpi_check_dsm(adev_dimm->handle, uuid, 1, 1ULL <<
i))
> > - set_bit(i, &nfit_mem->dsm_mask);
> > + to_nfit_uuid_msk(adev_dimm->handle, nfit_cmd_family_tbl,
> > + &nfit_mem->dsm_uuid,
&nfit_mem->dsm_mask);
>
> Why is this replacing acpi_check_dsm() with an open-coded implementation?
Not sure of the question.
Is it why acpi_nfit_sup_func? or why to_nfit_uuid_msk?
if why to_nfit_uuid_msk? We need to determine both mask and uuid
(previously uuid was assumed.)
For readability I'd prefer two operations in acpi_nfit_add_dimm():
find_family() followed by probing the supported functions in that
family rather than hiding that detail in a combined to_nfit_uuid_msk()
routine. My preference is that a to_*() routine just do one
conversion and return its value directly, not pass-by-reference
multiple conversions.
if why acpi_nfit_sup_func? A few reasons.
Want to allow user space to get mask. This is a "safe" way to know
that calls are being made to/returned from firmware.
Didn't want to hard code upper limit on function (at least not less
than having function 0 .. 63 which the acpi layer is doing.)
Finally didn't want to call acpi_check_dsm 64 times per nvdimm. :)
But, we can go back to iterating over 0..63, both work.
If we limit the search to the known / specified function codes as
mentioned above then we won't be searching the entire 64-bit space
per-dimm.
Question, if non-root nodes are changed from DSM to LSM, won't
we need to add a function for that?
To me, LSM just seems like yet another 'family'.