Re: [PATCH v4] i2c: designware: Fix corrupted memory seen in the ISR

[Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>]

On 11/9/23 20:00, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 03:19:27AM +0000, Jan Bottorff wrote:
>> When running on a many core ARM64 server, errors were
>> happening in the ISR that looked like corrupted memory. These
>> corruptions would fix themselves if small delays were inserted
>> in the ISR. Errors reported by the driver included "i2c_designware
>> APMC0D0F:00: i2c_dw_xfer_msg: invalid target address" and
>> "i2c_designware APMC0D0F:00:controller timed out" during
>> in-band IPMI SSIF stress tests.
>>
>> The problem was determined to be memory writes in the driver were not
>> becoming visible to all cores when execution rapidly shifted between
>> cores, like when a register write immediately triggers an ISR.
>> Processors with weak memory ordering, like ARM64, make no
>> guarantees about the order normal memory writes become globally
>> visible, unless barrier instructions are used to control ordering.
>>
>> To solve this, regmap accessor functions configured by this driver
>> were changed to use non-relaxed forms of the low-level register
>> access functions, which include a barrier on platforms that require
>> it. This assures memory writes before a controller register access are
>> visible to all cores. The community concluded defaulting to correct
>> operation outweighed defaulting to the small performance gains from
>> using relaxed access functions. Being a low speed device added weight to
>> this choice of default register access behavior.
> 
> ...
> 
>> v3->v4: add missing changelog
> 
> Side note: Usually it's enough to just reply to the patch with the changelog.
> 
> ...
> 
>> -	*val = swab32(readl_relaxed(dev->base + reg));
>> +	*val = swab32(readl(dev->base + reg));
> 
>> -	writel_relaxed(swab32(val), dev->base + reg);
>> +	writel(swab32(val), dev->base + reg);
> 
> I'm wondering why ioread32be() / iowrite32be() can't be used here...
> 
> Probably it would require to switch entire IO to use ioreadXX() /
> iowriteXX() APIs and since we touch all of them (?) may be it makes
> sense convert to use them at the same time. Dunno.
> 
I would say cosmetic conversions are better to go to another patch.

For this patch:

Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>