From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A215C433E0 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 22:29:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ml01.01.org (ml01.01.org [198.145.21.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6DAF64E9B for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 22:29:06 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org E6DAF64E9B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-nvdimm-bounces@lists.01.org Received: from ml01.vlan13.01.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CEEE100EA91C; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 14:29:06 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=192.55.52.115; helo=mga14.intel.com; envelope-from=ben.widawsky@intel.com; receiver= Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AC19100EA91A for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 14:29:04 -0800 (PST) IronPort-SDR: qllQJaF2XMlC1nmL7zJmSZMagw2JevwohS7ypilYxnZ7lFC4zOLcIh65VWfqjFm0xk5ZPKXIi7 ufzNDF3kHfLg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9882"; a="179985799" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,393,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="179985799" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2021 14:29:02 -0800 IronPort-SDR: 5k54TRuXSFYguG48n8oFgjW0ALUfYSRlyCH8wD4wKv55Pv1uHA5nBT+52JM4JclOKQLAlRDEkG x2XqBb3YG/BQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,393,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="370137119" Received: from jambrizm-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO intel.com) ([10.252.133.15]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2021 14:29:00 -0800 Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 14:28:59 -0800 From: Ben Widawsky To: David Rientjes Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] cxl/mem: Find device capabilities Message-ID: <20210201222859.lzw3gvxuqebukvr6@intel.com> References: <20210130002438.1872527-1-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <20210130002438.1872527-4-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <234711bf-c03f-9aca-e0b5-ca677add3ea@google.com> <20210201165352.wi7tzpnd4ymxlms4@intel.com> <32f33dd-97a-8b1c-d488-e5198a3d7748@google.com> <20210201215857.ud5cpg7hbxj2j5bx@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Message-ID-Hash: W2ANYIODY4DG7HHGNG5XB4XEUD3FDPG7 X-Message-ID-Hash: W2ANYIODY4DG7HHGNG5XB4XEUD3FDPG7 X-MailFrom: ben.widawsky@intel.com X-Mailman-Rule-Hits: nonmember-moderation X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation CC: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , Chris Browy , Christoph Hellwig , Jon Masters , Jonathan Cameron , Rafael Wysocki , Randy Dunlap , daniel.lll@alibaba-inc.com, "John Groves (jgroves)" , "Kelley, Sean V" X-Mailman-Version: 3.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: "Linux-nvdimm developer list." Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 21-02-01 14:23:47, David Rientjes wrote: > On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Ben Widawsky wrote: > > > > > > > +static int cxl_mem_setup_mailbox(struct cxl_mem *cxlm) > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > + const int cap = cxl_read_mbox_reg32(cxlm, CXLDEV_MB_CAPS_OFFSET); > > > > > > + > > > > > > + cxlm->mbox.payload_size = > > > > > > + 1 << CXL_GET_FIELD(cap, CXLDEV_MB_CAP_PAYLOAD_SIZE); > > > > > > + > > > > > > + /* 8.2.8.4.3 */ > > > > > > + if (cxlm->mbox.payload_size < 256) { > > > > > > + dev_err(&cxlm->pdev->dev, "Mailbox is too small (%zub)", > > > > > > + cxlm->mbox.payload_size); > > > > > > + return -ENXIO; > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > Any reason not to check cxlm->mbox.payload_size > (1 << 20) as well and > > > > > return ENXIO if true? > > > > > > > > If some crazy vendor wanted to ship a mailbox larger than 1M, why should the > > > > driver not allow it? > > > > > > > > > > Because the spec disallows it :) > > > > I don't see it being the driver's responsibility to enforce spec correctness > > though. In certain cases, I need to use the spec, like I have to pick /some/ > > mailbox timeout. For other cases... > > > > I'm not too familiar with what other similar drivers may or may not do in > > situations like this. The current 256 limit is mostly a reflection of that being > > too small to even support advertised mandatory commands. So things can't work in > > that scenario, but things can work if they have a larger register size (so long > > as the BAR advertises enough space). > > > > I don't think things can work above 1MB, either, though. Section > 8.2.8.4.5 specifies 20 bits to define the payload length, if this is > larger than cxlm->mbox.payload_size it would venture into the reserved > bits of the command register. > > So is the idea to allow cxl_mem_setup_mailbox() to succeed with a payload > size > 1MB and then only check 20 bits for the command register? So it's probably a spec bug, but actually the payload size is 21 bits... I'll check if that was a mistake. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-leave@lists.01.org