public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@huawei.com>
To: Shameerali Kolothum Thodi <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
	Guanghui Feng <guanghuifeng@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: "sudeep.holla@arm.com" <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	"rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com" <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	"alikernel-developer@linux.alibaba.com" 
	<alikernel-developer@linux.alibaba.com>,
	"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>,
	"catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ACPI/IORT: Remove erroneous id_count check in iort_node_get_rmr_info()
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 17:13:10 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <613da2c3-d515-b49c-4ff3-cf94836b2acf@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <597f481b0e5149dabe4821ca618af6b3@huawei.com>

On 2023/7/18 16:56, Shameerali Kolothum Thodi wrote:
>> [+Catalin, Will, Shameer]
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 07:33:45PM +0800, Guanghui Feng wrote:
>>> According to the ARM IORT specifications DEN 0049 issue E,
>>> the "Number of IDs" field in the ID mapping format reports
>>> the number of IDs in the mapping range minus one.
>>>
>>> In iort_node_get_rmr_info(), we erroneously skip ID mappings
>>> whose "Number of IDs" equal to 0, resulting in valid mapping
>>> nodes with a single ID to map being skipped, which is wrong.
>>>
>>> Fix iort_node_get_rmr_info() by removing the bogus id_count
>>> check.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 491cf4a6735a ("ACPI/IORT: Add support to retrieve IORT RMR
>> reserved regions")
>>> Signed-off-by: Guanghui Feng<guanghuifeng@linux.alibaba.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 3 ---
>>>   1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
>>> index 3631230..56d8873 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
>>> @@ -1007,9 +1007,6 @@ static void iort_node_get_rmr_info(struct
>> acpi_iort_node *node,
>>>   	for (i = 0; i < node->mapping_count; i++, map++) {
>>>   		struct acpi_iort_node *parent;
>>>
>>> -		if (!map->id_count)
>>> -			continue;
>>> -
>>>   		parent = ACPI_ADD_PTR(struct acpi_iort_node, iort_table,
>>>   				      map->output_reference);
>>>   		if (parent != iommu)
>> Shameer, I know this may look like overkill since the hunk we are
>> removing is buggy but can you please test this patch on platforms
>> with RMR to make sure we are not triggering regressions by removing
>> it (by the specs that's what should be done but current firmware
>> is always something to reckon with) ?
> Yes, that is a valid fix. Unlikely it will be a problem. Anyway, I have requested
> Hanjun to help with the testing as I don't have a test setup with me now.

Valid fix for me as well, we had a firmware bug which reported the
numbers of ID as 1 when we only have one ID mapping, so remove the
check is fine for the old firmware, but to make it sure, we need some
test before give it a pass.

> 
> Hanjun, please help.

I need some time to get it properly tested on two versions of firmware,
and get the test machine properly setup, please allow me give the
feedback next week.

Thanks
Hanjun

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-19  9:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-17 11:33 [PATCH v3] ACPI/IORT: Remove erroneous id_count check in iort_node_get_rmr_info() Guanghui Feng
2023-07-18  7:52 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-07-18  8:54   ` guanghui.fgh
2023-07-18  9:16     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-07-18  8:56   ` Shameerali Kolothum Thodi
2023-07-19  9:13     ` Hanjun Guo [this message]
2023-07-26  9:07       ` Hanjun Guo
2023-07-27 13:39 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-07-27 13:59   ` Catalin Marinas
2023-07-27 14:17     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-07-27 15:00       ` Will Deacon
2023-07-27 15:08         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-07-28 12:05           ` Catalin Marinas
2023-07-28 13:55 ` Catalin Marinas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=613da2c3-d515-b49c-4ff3-cf94836b2acf@huawei.com \
    --to=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=alikernel-developer@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=guanghuifeng@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com \
    --cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox