* [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer @ 2017-03-21 19:16 Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-21 19:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 10:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-21 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel, linux-efi Cc: lorenzo.pieralisi, Ard Biesheuvel, matt, linux-pci, heyi.guo, pjones, hanjun.guo, bhelgaas On UEFI systems, the PCI subsystem is enumerated by the firmware, and if a graphical framebuffer is exposed by a PCI device, its base address and size are exposed to the OS via the Graphics Output Protocol (GOP). On arm64 PCI systems, the entire PCI hierarchy is reconfigured from scratch at boot. This may result in the GOP framebuffer address to become stale, if the BAR covering the framebuffer is modified. This will cause the framebuffer to become unresponsive, and may in some cases result in unpredictable behavior if the range is reassigned to another device. So add a quirk to the EFI fb driver to find the BAR associated with the GOP base address, and set the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED attribute so that the PCI core will leave it alone. Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> --- As it turns out, setting the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED flag is not sufficient to make the PCI core leave the BARs alone, so instead, the BAR resource is claimed in the quirk handler. As suggested by Lorenzo, a check is added that the device has memory decoding enabled, and if it doesn't, no attempt is made to use the EFI framebuffer. drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c index 8c4dc1e1f94f..eeeaf78c4a5b 100644 --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ #include <linux/efi.h> #include <linux/errno.h> #include <linux/fb.h> +#include <linux/pci.h> #include <linux/platform_device.h> #include <linux/screen_info.h> #include <video/vga.h> @@ -143,6 +144,9 @@ static struct attribute *efifb_attrs[] = { }; ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efifb); +static bool pci_bar_found; /* did we find a BAR matching the efifb base? */ +static bool pci_bar_disabled; /* was it disabled? */ + static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) { struct fb_info *info; @@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) unsigned int size_total; char *option = NULL; - if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) + if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI || pci_bar_disabled) return -ENODEV; if (fb_get_options("efifb", &option)) @@ -360,3 +364,55 @@ static struct platform_driver efifb_driver = { }; builtin_platform_driver(efifb_driver); + +static void claim_efifb_bar(struct pci_dev *dev, int idx) +{ + u16 word; + + pci_bar_found = true; + + if (pci_claim_resource(dev, idx)) { + pci_bar_disabled = true; + dev_err(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: failed to claim efifb BAR\n", idx); + return; + } + + pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &word); + if (!(word & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY)) { + pci_bar_disabled = true; + dev_err(&dev->dev, + "BAR %d: efifb BAR has memory decoding disabled!\n", idx); + return; + } + + dev_info(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: claimed for efifb\n", idx); +} + +static void efifb_fixup_resources(struct pci_dev *dev) +{ + u64 base = screen_info.lfb_base; + u64 size = screen_info.lfb_size; + int i; + + if (pci_bar_found || screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) + return; + + if (screen_info.capabilities & VIDEO_CAPABILITY_64BIT_BASE) + base |= (u64)screen_info.ext_lfb_base << 32; + + if (!base) + return; + + for (i = 0; i < PCI_STD_RESOURCE_END; i++) { + struct resource *res = &dev->resource[i]; + + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) + continue; + + if (res->start <= base && res->end >= base + size - 1) { + claim_efifb_bar(dev, i); + break; + } + } +} +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, efifb_fixup_resources); -- 2.7.4 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer 2017-03-21 19:16 [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-21 19:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 10:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-21 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi, Ard Biesheuvel, Matt Fleming, linux-pci, Heyi Guo, Peter Jones, Hanjun Guo, Bjorn Helgaas On 21 March 2017 at 19:16, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> wrote: > On UEFI systems, the PCI subsystem is enumerated by the firmware, > and if a graphical framebuffer is exposed by a PCI device, its base > address and size are exposed to the OS via the Graphics Output > Protocol (GOP). > > On arm64 PCI systems, the entire PCI hierarchy is reconfigured from > scratch at boot. This may result in the GOP framebuffer address to > become stale, if the BAR covering the framebuffer is modified. This > will cause the framebuffer to become unresponsive, and may in some > cases result in unpredictable behavior if the range is reassigned to > another device. > > So add a quirk to the EFI fb driver to find the BAR associated with > the GOP base address, and set the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED attribute so > that the PCI core will leave it alone. > This final paragraph is now out of date, and should be fixed. Apologies. > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> > --- > As it turns out, setting the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED flag is not sufficient > to make the PCI core leave the BARs alone, so instead, the BAR resource > is claimed in the quirk handler. > > As suggested by Lorenzo, a check is added that the device has memory > decoding enabled, and if it doesn't, no attempt is made to use the > EFI framebuffer. > > drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > index 8c4dc1e1f94f..eeeaf78c4a5b 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ > #include <linux/efi.h> > #include <linux/errno.h> > #include <linux/fb.h> > +#include <linux/pci.h> > #include <linux/platform_device.h> > #include <linux/screen_info.h> > #include <video/vga.h> > @@ -143,6 +144,9 @@ static struct attribute *efifb_attrs[] = { > }; > ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efifb); > > +static bool pci_bar_found; /* did we find a BAR matching the efifb base? */ > +static bool pci_bar_disabled; /* was it disabled? */ > + > static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) > { > struct fb_info *info; > @@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) > unsigned int size_total; > char *option = NULL; > > - if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) > + if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI || pci_bar_disabled) > return -ENODEV; > > if (fb_get_options("efifb", &option)) > @@ -360,3 +364,55 @@ static struct platform_driver efifb_driver = { > }; > > builtin_platform_driver(efifb_driver); > + > +static void claim_efifb_bar(struct pci_dev *dev, int idx) > +{ > + u16 word; > + > + pci_bar_found = true; > + > + if (pci_claim_resource(dev, idx)) { > + pci_bar_disabled = true; > + dev_err(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: failed to claim efifb BAR\n", idx); > + return; > + } > + > + pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &word); > + if (!(word & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY)) { > + pci_bar_disabled = true; > + dev_err(&dev->dev, > + "BAR %d: efifb BAR has memory decoding disabled!\n", idx); > + return; > + } > + > + dev_info(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: claimed for efifb\n", idx); > +} > + > +static void efifb_fixup_resources(struct pci_dev *dev) > +{ > + u64 base = screen_info.lfb_base; > + u64 size = screen_info.lfb_size; > + int i; > + > + if (pci_bar_found || screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) > + return; > + > + if (screen_info.capabilities & VIDEO_CAPABILITY_64BIT_BASE) > + base |= (u64)screen_info.ext_lfb_base << 32; > + > + if (!base) > + return; > + > + for (i = 0; i < PCI_STD_RESOURCE_END; i++) { > + struct resource *res = &dev->resource[i]; > + > + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) > + continue; > + > + if (res->start <= base && res->end >= base + size - 1) { > + claim_efifb_bar(dev, i); > + break; > + } > + } > +} > +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, efifb_fixup_resources); > -- > 2.7.4 > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer 2017-03-21 19:16 [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-21 19:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-22 10:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2017-03-22 11:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel 1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2017-03-22 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: linux-efi, matt, linux-pci, heyi.guo, pjones, hanjun.guo, bhelgaas, linux-arm-kernel On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 07:16:50PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On UEFI systems, the PCI subsystem is enumerated by the firmware, > and if a graphical framebuffer is exposed by a PCI device, its base > address and size are exposed to the OS via the Graphics Output > Protocol (GOP). > > On arm64 PCI systems, the entire PCI hierarchy is reconfigured from > scratch at boot. This may result in the GOP framebuffer address to > become stale, if the BAR covering the framebuffer is modified. This > will cause the framebuffer to become unresponsive, and may in some > cases result in unpredictable behavior if the range is reassigned to > another device. > > So add a quirk to the EFI fb driver to find the BAR associated with > the GOP base address, and set the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED attribute so > that the PCI core will leave it alone. > > Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> > --- > As it turns out, setting the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED flag is not sufficient > to make the PCI core leave the BARs alone, so instead, the BAR resource > is claimed in the quirk handler. > > As suggested by Lorenzo, a check is added that the device has memory > decoding enabled, and if it doesn't, no attempt is made to use the > EFI framebuffer. > > drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > index 8c4dc1e1f94f..eeeaf78c4a5b 100644 > --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ > #include <linux/efi.h> > #include <linux/errno.h> > #include <linux/fb.h> > +#include <linux/pci.h> > #include <linux/platform_device.h> > #include <linux/screen_info.h> > #include <video/vga.h> > @@ -143,6 +144,9 @@ static struct attribute *efifb_attrs[] = { > }; > ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efifb); > > +static bool pci_bar_found; /* did we find a BAR matching the efifb base? */ > +static bool pci_bar_disabled; /* was it disabled? */ > + > static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) > { > struct fb_info *info; > @@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) > unsigned int size_total; > char *option = NULL; > > - if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) > + if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI || pci_bar_disabled) > return -ENODEV; > > if (fb_get_options("efifb", &option)) > @@ -360,3 +364,55 @@ static struct platform_driver efifb_driver = { > }; > > builtin_platform_driver(efifb_driver); > + > +static void claim_efifb_bar(struct pci_dev *dev, int idx) > +{ > + u16 word; > + > + pci_bar_found = true; > + > + if (pci_claim_resource(dev, idx)) { I would not do that. If claiming the resource succeeds, it will become immutable (ie it becomes part of the resource tree), if it is your FB fine if it isn't this will mess things up since a) you won't be able to claim the PCI resources for the real FB and b) you won't be able to reallocate the PCI resources for the device we *think* is the FB but it actually isn't (unless we force a realloc). So, I would carry out the check below first, if the device is enabled we should flag its resource IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED otherwise just do nothing and let PCI core (through arch specific realloc policy) handle it. Side note: I *think* it should be fine to claim a resource twice (ie in x86 the FB would have been claimed already by core x86 code), just thought it is worth checking. Lorenzo > + pci_bar_disabled = true; > + dev_err(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: failed to claim efifb BAR\n", idx); > + return; > + } > + > + pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &word); > + if (!(word & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY)) { > + pci_bar_disabled = true; > + dev_err(&dev->dev, > + "BAR %d: efifb BAR has memory decoding disabled!\n", idx); > + return; > + } > + > + dev_info(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: claimed for efifb\n", idx); > +} > + > +static void efifb_fixup_resources(struct pci_dev *dev) > +{ > + u64 base = screen_info.lfb_base; > + u64 size = screen_info.lfb_size; > + int i; > + > + if (pci_bar_found || screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) > + return; > + > + if (screen_info.capabilities & VIDEO_CAPABILITY_64BIT_BASE) > + base |= (u64)screen_info.ext_lfb_base << 32; > + > + if (!base) > + return; > + > + for (i = 0; i < PCI_STD_RESOURCE_END; i++) { > + struct resource *res = &dev->resource[i]; > + > + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) > + continue; > + > + if (res->start <= base && res->end >= base + size - 1) { > + claim_efifb_bar(dev, i); > + break; > + } > + } > +} > +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, efifb_fixup_resources); > -- > 2.7.4 > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer 2017-03-22 10:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2017-03-22 11:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 11:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-22 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: linux-efi, matt, linux-pci, heyi.guo, pjones, hanjun.guo, bhelgaas, linux-arm-kernel > On 22 Mar 2017, at 10:29, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 07:16:50PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On UEFI systems, the PCI subsystem is enumerated by the firmware, >> and if a graphical framebuffer is exposed by a PCI device, its base >> address and size are exposed to the OS via the Graphics Output >> Protocol (GOP). >> >> On arm64 PCI systems, the entire PCI hierarchy is reconfigured from >> scratch at boot. This may result in the GOP framebuffer address to >> become stale, if the BAR covering the framebuffer is modified. This >> will cause the framebuffer to become unresponsive, and may in some >> cases result in unpredictable behavior if the range is reassigned to >> another device. >> >> So add a quirk to the EFI fb driver to find the BAR associated with >> the GOP base address, and set the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED attribute so >> that the PCI core will leave it alone. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> >> --- >> As it turns out, setting the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED flag is not sufficient >> to make the PCI core leave the BARs alone, so instead, the BAR resource >> is claimed in the quirk handler. >> >> As suggested by Lorenzo, a check is added that the device has memory >> decoding enabled, and if it doesn't, no attempt is made to use the >> EFI framebuffer. >> >> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c >> index 8c4dc1e1f94f..eeeaf78c4a5b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c >> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c >> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ >> #include <linux/efi.h> >> #include <linux/errno.h> >> #include <linux/fb.h> >> +#include <linux/pci.h> >> #include <linux/platform_device.h> >> #include <linux/screen_info.h> >> #include <video/vga.h> >> @@ -143,6 +144,9 @@ static struct attribute *efifb_attrs[] = { >> }; >> ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efifb); >> >> +static bool pci_bar_found; /* did we find a BAR matching the efifb base? */ >> +static bool pci_bar_disabled; /* was it disabled? */ >> + >> static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) >> { >> struct fb_info *info; >> @@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) >> unsigned int size_total; >> char *option = NULL; >> >> - if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) >> + if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI || pci_bar_disabled) >> return -ENODEV; >> >> if (fb_get_options("efifb", &option)) >> @@ -360,3 +364,55 @@ static struct platform_driver efifb_driver = { >> }; >> >> builtin_platform_driver(efifb_driver); >> + >> +static void claim_efifb_bar(struct pci_dev *dev, int idx) >> +{ >> + u16 word; >> + >> + pci_bar_found = true; >> + >> + if (pci_claim_resource(dev, idx)) { > > I would not do that. If claiming the resource succeeds, it will become > immutable (ie it becomes part of the resource tree), if it is your FB > fine if it isn't this will mess things up since a) you won't be able to > claim the PCI resources for the real FB and b) you won't be able to > reallocate the PCI resources for the device we *think* is the FB but it > actually isn't (unless we force a realloc). > > So, I would carry out the check below first, if the device is enabled > we should flag its resource IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED otherwise just do > nothing and let PCI core (through arch specific realloc policy) handle > it. > Well, it turned out that this does not actually work: the BAR is not reassigned, but the same range ends up being given to another device in some cases. > Side note: I *think* it should be fine to claim a resource twice > (ie in x86 the FB would have been claimed already by core x86 code), > just thought it is worth checking. > > Lorenzo > >> + pci_bar_disabled = true; >> + dev_err(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: failed to claim efifb BAR\n", idx); >> + return; >> + } >> + >> + pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &word); >> + if (!(word & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY)) { >> + pci_bar_disabled = true; >> + dev_err(&dev->dev, >> + "BAR %d: efifb BAR has memory decoding disabled!\n", idx); >> + return; >> + } >> + >> + dev_info(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: claimed for efifb\n", idx); >> +} >> + >> +static void efifb_fixup_resources(struct pci_dev *dev) >> +{ >> + u64 base = screen_info.lfb_base; >> + u64 size = screen_info.lfb_size; >> + int i; >> + >> + if (pci_bar_found || screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) >> + return; >> + >> + if (screen_info.capabilities & VIDEO_CAPABILITY_64BIT_BASE) >> + base |= (u64)screen_info.ext_lfb_base << 32; >> + >> + if (!base) >> + return; >> + >> + for (i = 0; i < PCI_STD_RESOURCE_END; i++) { >> + struct resource *res = &dev->resource[i]; >> + >> + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) >> + continue; >> + >> + if (res->start <= base && res->end >= base + size - 1) { >> + claim_efifb_bar(dev, i); >> + break; >> + } >> + } >> +} >> +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, efifb_fixup_resources); >> -- >> 2.7.4 >> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer 2017-03-22 11:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-22 11:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2017-03-22 12:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2017-03-22 11:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: linux-efi, matt, linux-pci, heyi.guo, pjones, hanjun.guo, bhelgaas, yinghai, linux-arm-kernel [+Yinghai] On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:08:48AM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > On 22 Mar 2017, at 10:29, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 07:16:50PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > >> On UEFI systems, the PCI subsystem is enumerated by the firmware, > >> and if a graphical framebuffer is exposed by a PCI device, its base > >> address and size are exposed to the OS via the Graphics Output > >> Protocol (GOP). > >> > >> On arm64 PCI systems, the entire PCI hierarchy is reconfigured from > >> scratch at boot. This may result in the GOP framebuffer address to > >> become stale, if the BAR covering the framebuffer is modified. This > >> will cause the framebuffer to become unresponsive, and may in some > >> cases result in unpredictable behavior if the range is reassigned to > >> another device. > >> > >> So add a quirk to the EFI fb driver to find the BAR associated with > >> the GOP base address, and set the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED attribute so > >> that the PCI core will leave it alone. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> > >> --- > >> As it turns out, setting the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED flag is not sufficient > >> to make the PCI core leave the BARs alone, so instead, the BAR resource > >> is claimed in the quirk handler. > >> > >> As suggested by Lorenzo, a check is added that the device has memory > >> decoding enabled, and if it doesn't, no attempt is made to use the > >> EFI framebuffer. > >> > >> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++- > >> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > >> index 8c4dc1e1f94f..eeeaf78c4a5b 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > >> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c > >> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ > >> #include <linux/efi.h> > >> #include <linux/errno.h> > >> #include <linux/fb.h> > >> +#include <linux/pci.h> > >> #include <linux/platform_device.h> > >> #include <linux/screen_info.h> > >> #include <video/vga.h> > >> @@ -143,6 +144,9 @@ static struct attribute *efifb_attrs[] = { > >> }; > >> ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efifb); > >> > >> +static bool pci_bar_found; /* did we find a BAR matching the efifb base? */ > >> +static bool pci_bar_disabled; /* was it disabled? */ > >> + > >> static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) > >> { > >> struct fb_info *info; > >> @@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) > >> unsigned int size_total; > >> char *option = NULL; > >> > >> - if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) > >> + if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI || pci_bar_disabled) > >> return -ENODEV; > >> > >> if (fb_get_options("efifb", &option)) > >> @@ -360,3 +364,55 @@ static struct platform_driver efifb_driver = { > >> }; > >> > >> builtin_platform_driver(efifb_driver); > >> + > >> +static void claim_efifb_bar(struct pci_dev *dev, int idx) > >> +{ > >> + u16 word; > >> + > >> + pci_bar_found = true; > >> + > >> + if (pci_claim_resource(dev, idx)) { > > > > I would not do that. If claiming the resource succeeds, it will become > > immutable (ie it becomes part of the resource tree), if it is your FB > > fine if it isn't this will mess things up since a) you won't be able to > > claim the PCI resources for the real FB and b) you won't be able to > > reallocate the PCI resources for the device we *think* is the FB but it > > actually isn't (unless we force a realloc). > > > > So, I would carry out the check below first, if the device is enabled > > we should flag its resource IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED otherwise just do > > nothing and let PCI core (through arch specific realloc policy) handle > > it. > > > > Well, it turned out that this does not actually work: the BAR is not > reassigned, but the same range ends up being given to another device > in some cases. Ok, that's because the PCI core just prevent assigning that resource but it does not request it (ie insert it in the resource tree) which is what you do when claiming it. I wonder how IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED works on eg x86, I think it is time to have a proper look into resources allocation code because there are bits and pieces that are quite obscure to me. I think I would reverse the order in which you carry out the BAR reservation anyway (first check if the device is enabled second request the resource ie claim it). Lorenzo > > > > Side note: I *think* it should be fine to claim a resource twice > > (ie in x86 the FB would have been claimed already by core x86 code), > > just thought it is worth checking. > > > > Lorenzo > > > >> + pci_bar_disabled = true; > >> + dev_err(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: failed to claim efifb BAR\n", idx); > >> + return; > >> + } > >> + > >> + pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &word); > >> + if (!(word & PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY)) { > >> + pci_bar_disabled = true; > >> + dev_err(&dev->dev, > >> + "BAR %d: efifb BAR has memory decoding disabled!\n", idx); > >> + return; > >> + } > >> + > >> + dev_info(&dev->dev, "BAR %d: claimed for efifb\n", idx); > >> +} > >> + > >> +static void efifb_fixup_resources(struct pci_dev *dev) > >> +{ > >> + u64 base = screen_info.lfb_base; > >> + u64 size = screen_info.lfb_size; > >> + int i; > >> + > >> + if (pci_bar_found || screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + if (screen_info.capabilities & VIDEO_CAPABILITY_64BIT_BASE) > >> + base |= (u64)screen_info.ext_lfb_base << 32; > >> + > >> + if (!base) > >> + return; > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < PCI_STD_RESOURCE_END; i++) { > >> + struct resource *res = &dev->resource[i]; > >> + > >> + if (!(res->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)) > >> + continue; > >> + > >> + if (res->start <= base && res->end >= base + size - 1) { > >> + claim_efifb_bar(dev, i); > >> + break; > >> + } > >> + } > >> +} > >> +DECLARE_PCI_FIXUP_HEADER(PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, efifb_fixup_resources); > >> -- > >> 2.7.4 > >> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer 2017-03-22 11:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2017-03-22 12:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 14:10 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread From: Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-22 12:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lorenzo Pieralisi Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Matt Fleming, linux-pci, Heyi Guo, Peter Jones, Hanjun Guo, Bjorn Helgaas, Yinghai Lu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On 22 March 2017 at 11:35, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote: > [+Yinghai] > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:08:48AM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> >> > On 22 Mar 2017, at 10:29, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 07:16:50PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> >> On UEFI systems, the PCI subsystem is enumerated by the firmware, >> >> and if a graphical framebuffer is exposed by a PCI device, its base >> >> address and size are exposed to the OS via the Graphics Output >> >> Protocol (GOP). >> >> >> >> On arm64 PCI systems, the entire PCI hierarchy is reconfigured from >> >> scratch at boot. This may result in the GOP framebuffer address to >> >> become stale, if the BAR covering the framebuffer is modified. This >> >> will cause the framebuffer to become unresponsive, and may in some >> >> cases result in unpredictable behavior if the range is reassigned to >> >> another device. >> >> >> >> So add a quirk to the EFI fb driver to find the BAR associated with >> >> the GOP base address, and set the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED attribute so >> >> that the PCI core will leave it alone. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> >> >> --- >> >> As it turns out, setting the IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED flag is not sufficient >> >> to make the PCI core leave the BARs alone, so instead, the BAR resource >> >> is claimed in the quirk handler. >> >> >> >> As suggested by Lorenzo, a check is added that the device has memory >> >> decoding enabled, and if it doesn't, no attempt is made to use the >> >> EFI framebuffer. >> >> >> >> drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++- >> >> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c >> >> index 8c4dc1e1f94f..eeeaf78c4a5b 100644 >> >> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/efifb.c >> >> @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ >> >> #include <linux/efi.h> >> >> #include <linux/errno.h> >> >> #include <linux/fb.h> >> >> +#include <linux/pci.h> >> >> #include <linux/platform_device.h> >> >> #include <linux/screen_info.h> >> >> #include <video/vga.h> >> >> @@ -143,6 +144,9 @@ static struct attribute *efifb_attrs[] = { >> >> }; >> >> ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(efifb); >> >> >> >> +static bool pci_bar_found; /* did we find a BAR matching the efifb base? */ >> >> +static bool pci_bar_disabled; /* was it disabled? */ >> >> + >> >> static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) >> >> { >> >> struct fb_info *info; >> >> @@ -152,7 +156,7 @@ static int efifb_probe(struct platform_device *dev) >> >> unsigned int size_total; >> >> char *option = NULL; >> >> >> >> - if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI) >> >> + if (screen_info.orig_video_isVGA != VIDEO_TYPE_EFI || pci_bar_disabled) >> >> return -ENODEV; >> >> >> >> if (fb_get_options("efifb", &option)) >> >> @@ -360,3 +364,55 @@ static struct platform_driver efifb_driver = { >> >> }; >> >> >> >> builtin_platform_driver(efifb_driver); >> >> + >> >> +static void claim_efifb_bar(struct pci_dev *dev, int idx) >> >> +{ >> >> + u16 word; >> >> + >> >> + pci_bar_found = true; >> >> + >> >> + if (pci_claim_resource(dev, idx)) { >> > >> > I would not do that. If claiming the resource succeeds, it will become >> > immutable (ie it becomes part of the resource tree), if it is your FB >> > fine if it isn't this will mess things up since a) you won't be able to >> > claim the PCI resources for the real FB and b) you won't be able to >> > reallocate the PCI resources for the device we *think* is the FB but it >> > actually isn't (unless we force a realloc). >> > >> > So, I would carry out the check below first, if the device is enabled >> > we should flag its resource IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED otherwise just do >> > nothing and let PCI core (through arch specific realloc policy) handle >> > it. >> > >> >> Well, it turned out that this does not actually work: the BAR is not >> reassigned, but the same range ends up being given to another device >> in some cases. > > Ok, that's because the PCI core just prevent assigning that resource > but it does not request it (ie insert it in the resource tree) which > is what you do when claiming it. > Yes, that seems to be what is happening. > I wonder how IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED works on eg x86, I think it is time > to have a proper look into resources allocation code because there > are bits and pieces that are quite obscure to me. > I did a quick test with calling request_mem_region(), in which case we end up with something like 10000000-3efeffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 10000000-101d4bff : efifb:pci 101d5000-101d5fff : 0000:00:01.0 101d6000-101d6fff : 0000:00:02.0 101d7000-101d7fff : 0000:00:04.0 101d7000-101d7fff : ehci_hcd 101d8000-101d8fff : 0000:00:05.0 101e0000-101effff : 0000:00:05.0 10200000-1023ffff : 0000:00:02.0 which works, because the region is no longer assigned to another BAR. But I think claiming the resource via the PCI subsystem is probably more appropriate, because then we get 10000000-3efeffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 10000000-10ffffff : 0000:00:05.0 10000000-101d4fff : efifb 11000000-1103ffff : 0000:00:02.0 11040000-1104ffff : 0000:00:05.0 11050000-11050fff : 0000:00:01.0 11051000-11051fff : 0000:00:02.0 11052000-11052fff : 0000:00:04.0 11052000-11052fff : ehci_hcd 11053000-11053fff : 0000:00:05.0 (Note that efifb does not use the entire BAR resource) > I think I would reverse the order in which you carry out the BAR > reservation anyway (first check if the device is enabled second request > the resource ie claim it). > I will spin a v3 with the check and the claim in reverse order. But I think we should keep the pci_claim() call. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer 2017-03-22 12:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel @ 2017-03-22 14:10 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2017-03-22 14:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ard Biesheuvel Cc: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, Matt Fleming, linux-pci, Heyi Guo, Peter Jones, Hanjun Guo, Bjorn Helgaas, Yinghai Lu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 12:39:57PM +0000, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: [...] > >> Well, it turned out that this does not actually work: the BAR is not > >> reassigned, but the same range ends up being given to another device > >> in some cases. > > > > Ok, that's because the PCI core just prevent assigning that resource > > but it does not request it (ie insert it in the resource tree) which > > is what you do when claiming it. > > > > Yes, that seems to be what is happening. > > > I wonder how IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED works on eg x86, I think it is time > > to have a proper look into resources allocation code because there > > are bits and pieces that are quite obscure to me. > > > > I did a quick test with calling request_mem_region(), in which case we > end up with something like > > 10000000-3efeffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 > 10000000-101d4bff : efifb:pci > 101d5000-101d5fff : 0000:00:01.0 > 101d6000-101d6fff : 0000:00:02.0 > 101d7000-101d7fff : 0000:00:04.0 > 101d7000-101d7fff : ehci_hcd > 101d8000-101d8fff : 0000:00:05.0 > 101e0000-101effff : 0000:00:05.0 > 10200000-1023ffff : 0000:00:02.0 > > which works, because the region is no longer assigned to another BAR. > > But I think claiming the resource via the PCI subsystem is probably > more appropriate, because then we get Yes it is. > 10000000-3efeffff : PCI Bus 0000:00 > 10000000-10ffffff : 0000:00:05.0 > 10000000-101d4fff : efifb > 11000000-1103ffff : 0000:00:02.0 > 11040000-1104ffff : 0000:00:05.0 > 11050000-11050fff : 0000:00:01.0 > 11051000-11051fff : 0000:00:02.0 > 11052000-11052fff : 0000:00:04.0 > 11052000-11052fff : ehci_hcd > 11053000-11053fff : 0000:00:05.0 > > (Note that efifb does not use the entire BAR resource) > > > I think I would reverse the order in which you carry out the BAR > > reservation anyway (first check if the device is enabled second request > > the resource ie claim it). > > > > I will spin a v3 with the check and the claim in reverse order. But I > think we should keep the pci_claim() call. Agreed. Thanks, Lorenzo _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-03-22 14:10 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2017-03-21 19:16 [PATCH v2] efifb: avoid reconfiguration of BAR that covers the framebuffer Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-21 19:18 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 10:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2017-03-22 11:08 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 11:35 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi 2017-03-22 12:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel 2017-03-22 14:10 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).