On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 09:32:36AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>
> On 2019/10/22 上午12:31, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:55:33PM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote:
> > > On 10/16/2019 5:53 PM, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > > Hi Zhu,
> > > >
> > > > thanks for your patch.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:10:40AM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote:
> > ...
> >
> > > > > +static void ifcvf_read_dev_config(struct ifcvf_hw *hw, u64 offset,
> > > > > + void *dst, int length)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + int i;
> > > > > + u8 *p;
> > > > > + u8 old_gen, new_gen;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + do {
> > > > > + old_gen = ioread8(&hw->common_cfg->config_generation);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + p = dst;
> > > > > + for (i = 0; i < length; i++)
> > > > > + *p++ = ioread8((u8 *)hw->dev_cfg + offset + i);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + new_gen = ioread8(&hw->common_cfg->config_generation);
> > > > > + } while (old_gen != new_gen);
> > > > Would it be wise to limit the number of iterations of the loop above?
> > > Thanks but I don't quite get it. This is used to make sure the function
> > > would get the latest config.
> > I am worried about the possibility that it will loop forever.
> > Could that happen?
> >
> > ...
>
>
> My understanding is that the function here is similar to virtio config
> generation [1]. So this can only happen for a buggy hardware.
Ok, so this circles back to my original question.
Should we put a bound on the number of times the loop runs
or should we accept that the kernel locks up if the HW is buggy?
>
> Thanks
>
> [1] https://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.1/csprd01/virtio-v1.1-csprd01.html
> Section 2.4.1
>
>
> >
> > > > > +static void io_write64_twopart(u64 val, u32 *lo, u32 *hi)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + iowrite32(val & ((1ULL << 32) - 1), lo);
> > > > > + iowrite32(val >> 32, hi);
> > > > > +}
> > > > I see this macro is also in virtio_pci_modern.c
> > > >
> > > > Assuming lo and hi aren't guaranteed to be sequential
> > > > and thus iowrite64_hi_lo() cannot be used perhaps
> > > > it would be good to add a common helper somewhere.
> > > Thanks, I will try after this IFC patchwork, I will cc you.
> > Thanks.
> >
> > ...
>
